Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly polarized, with a broad distribution ranging from very positive accounts of therapy, attentive staff, and a renovated, welcoming environment to severe negative reports describing neglect, unsanitary conditions, medication errors, and abusive or indifferent staff. A clear pattern emerges: many reviewers praise the therapy department (PT/OT) and cite successful short-term rehabilitation experiences, while others describe long-term care scenarios characterized by poor hygiene, safety risks, and neglect. Several reviews note recent management changes and renovations that have led to visible improvements for some residents, but a substantial number of reviews document persistent systemic problems that create significant concern for vulnerable patients and families.
Care quality and patient safety are key themes. Positive reports emphasize individualized rehabilitation plans, effective therapy that enabled return home, attentive nurses or aides who went above and beyond, and specific staff praised by name. Conversely, numerous reviews describe alarming neglect: residents left in wet or soiled diapers for hours, not bathed for weeks, nails embedded in skin, sitting in feces or urine, soiled sheets, and delayed or missed personal care. Medication management is another major area of concern: reviewers report delayed doses, missed antibiotics, insulin dosing worries, alleged overmedication (pain pills causing hallucinations), and serious procedural problems (IV meds administered improperly or too quickly). Some reviewers allege inappropriate or unexplained use of Narcan and express worry about how clinical decisions are made. There are also multiple reports that transfers to higher-level care were delayed for cost reasons, which raises safety and ethical questions.
Staff behavior and communication show wide variability. Many reviewers explicitly praise individual staff members—nurses, CNAs, therapists, and admissions personnel—calling them compassionate, professional, and responsive. Others describe unprofessional conduct including rudeness, gossiping, verbal abuse, rolling eyes at family members, staff hiding in break rooms, and receptionists being dismissive. Call bells frequently go unanswered or responses are slow, and families report poor or inconsistent communication from administration, especially around adverse events, deaths, or significant care changes. Several reviews mention HIPAA/privacy lapses or breaches in dignity and respect. Staffing levels appear to be an issue: reviewers commonly describe aides and nurses as overburdened and under-resourced, which likely contributes to inconsistent care quality across shifts and units.
Facilities, maintenance, and sanitation show both praise and severe criticism. Multiple reviewers note positive renovation work: new flooring, upgraded equipment, remodeled areas, and an improved atmosphere under new ownership—comments that the building looks modern, warm, and more home-like. However, a large number of reviews describe ongoing sanitation and maintenance failures: persistent foul odors of urine and feces in halls and rooms, overflowing toxic/garbage bins, broken furniture and baseboards, HVAC problems (rooms too hot or cold), pest sightings (fruit flies in food, roaches, mice, bats), and filthy dining areas (cold meals, food contamination, and poor food handling). Housekeeping appears inconsistent—some rooms and floors are clean while others are reported as filthy, with sheets not changed and trash left on floors.
Administration, billing, and organizational issues are recurring themes. Many reviewers credit recent leadership for corrective actions and improved customer service, while others accuse administration of apathy, defensiveness, and poor follow-through. Billing disputes and allegations of overcharging—especially after Medicare coverage ends—are mentioned several times. Families reported receiving calls about money shortly after a death and difficulty resolving financial disputes. Some reviewers called for state investigations and regulatory oversight because of the severity of safety and sanitation allegations.
Dining, activities, and community life are mixed. Activity programs, volunteer events, and communal programs are described positively in a number of reviews, and some residents enjoyed the social environment and consistent recreational offerings. Meal quality, however, received many complaints about cold food, poor presentation, inconsistent service, and even food allergy incidents (fish served despite a reported allergy). At the same time, some reviews do compliment the food and dining staff.
Patterns and implications: the reviews portray a facility in transition with a bifurcated reputation. There is evidence of legitimate strengths—particularly an effective therapy department, invested individual employees, and a visible renovation/upgrade effort under new management. Nonetheless, there are serious and recurring red flags that appear in multiple, independent reviews: neglectful personal care, medication safety concerns, persistent sanitation and pest issues, slow emergency response or transfer decisions influenced by cost, and inconsistent management responsiveness. These negative reports are not isolated single-issue complaints but cover multiple domains (clinical safety, hygiene, communication, staffing, billing), which suggests systemic problems that require sustained corrective action and external oversight.
For prospective residents and families: if the primary need is short-term, therapy-focused rehab, reviewers often report good outcomes with PT/OT teams and newer rehab resources. For long-term or memory care placements—especially for highly vulnerable or medically complex residents—several reviewers strongly advise caution until the facility consistently demonstrates sustained improvements across cleanliness, staffing levels, medication safety, and administrative responsiveness. Families considering Bay Harbor should request recent inspection reports, ask about staffing ratios and turnover, verify current infection control and pest management protocols, seek references for the specific unit/floor being considered, and insist on clear discharge and care plans. Reviewers indicate that experiences can vary dramatically depending on unit, shift, and the involvement of recently appointed leadership, so careful, ongoing monitoring is essential.
