Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans positive with important caveats. Multiple reviewers emphasize that the owners and several staff members are attentive, compassionate, and family-oriented. The owner and his wife are repeatedly described as caring, responsive, and willing to listen and accommodate requests, and family members report receiving emotional support. Several reviews highlight proactive health management — arranging doctor visits and responding to health challenges — and note that residents are treated like family and kept clean. The facility's atmosphere is described by some as clean, bright, and located in a pleasant neighborhood, with outdoor access for residents and recent upgrades such as painting, new furniture, and a refreshed TV room. For some families, pricing and the facility's appearance are acceptable or reasonable.
However, recurring operational and safety concerns temper the positive comments. A major pattern is limited staffing: reviewers report times when only one caregiver or a single nurse is on duty, and that caregiver may also be responsible for preparing meals. This staffing limitation is raised both as a direct care concern and as a contributor to other problems, including small meal portions, minimal activities, and inconsistency in the level of compassion shown by some staff members. Several reviewers explicitly note that programming and activities are sparse, which may affect residents' engagement and quality of life.
Facility maintenance and safety issues appear in multiple summaries. While some describe the home as clean and newly remodeled, others note rust throughout the home, backyard debris, and an unsafe sidewalk — items that raise questions about ongoing upkeep and hazard mitigation. Cost is another mixed area: while some find the price acceptable, others report that the private rate is high, that care went over their budget, and that a $1,000 deposit is required to hold a spot. These financial factors may be a barrier or an unpleasant surprise for some families.
There are also inconsistent reports about staff compassion and past care quality. While many praise the owner, his wife, and several caregivers, a few reviewers describe hurtful staff behavior or lack of compassion. One review mentions a previously negligent facility and a severe bedsore during hospice care; although it is not fully clear whether this refers to Tender Care Assisted Living 2 or a prior placement, the inclusion of that experience in these summaries signals families' sensitivity to quality and vigilance about wounds and end-of-life care.
In sum, the dominant strengths reported are strong, family-centered ownership and some attentive caregivers who provide emotional support, individualized attention, and active health coordination. The primary concerns are limited staffing levels that place heavy demands on caregivers, resulting in small meal portions, limited activities, inconsistent compassion from some staff, and potential safety/maintenance lapses. Recent renovations and a clean, bright environment are positives, but physical maintenance issues cited by others and financial concerns (high private rates and required deposit) are notable downsides. Prospective families should weigh the evident personalized attention and owner involvement against reports of understaffing, limited programming, maintenance hazards, and variable cost, and should ask specific questions about staffing ratios, activity schedules, meal planning, maintenance status, and deposit/refund policies during a tour.
