The reviews for Hazel Findlay are strongly mixed, revealing a facility with clear strengths but also notable and repeated weaknesses. On the positive side, many reviewers praise the compassionate, kind, and attentive front-line staff—particularly nurses and rehab therapists—who are credited with delivering quality care, effective physical therapy, and going the extra mile for residents. The admissions team and hospice staff also receive commendations, and features such as large rooms (private and semi-private), weekly bedding changes, a clean entrance, family-friendly visiting, pet-friendly policies, on-site religious services, and attractive outdoor grounds are repeatedly mentioned as important positives. A significant number of families explicitly recommend the facility and express deep gratitude for the care their loved ones received, especially for rehabilitation stays and short-term rehab outcomes.
However, a prominent theme across the summaries is notable inconsistency. Several reviewers describe excellent care and an "amazing rehab program," while others report poor experiences attributed to rude or sarcastic aides, inattentive front desk personnel, long waits for assistance, and late medication passes. This variability suggests staffing reliability and oversight are uneven; some shifts or wings appear well-staffed and attentive, while others exhibit neglect or poor customer service. Multiple reviewers specifically call for stronger staff oversight and improvements to front-desk responsiveness.
Facility and environment observations also split opinions. Some reviewers appreciate the cleanliness of common areas and the pleasant outdoor spaces (flowers, bird feeders, covered seating), but many describe older, outdated wings with a hospital-like, sterile atmosphere that lacks a homey or apartment-like feel. Complaints include hospital beds in rooms, limited ability to customize rooms, old uncomfortable beds, and reports of inadequate air conditioning or cold conditions in parts of the facility. These physical shortcomings are particularly noted by those comparing Hazel Findlay to newer, nicer senior apartments.
Rehabilitation is a recurring focus. Several reviewers call the rehab program impressive and effective, praising therapy staff and positive outcomes. Conversely, other reviewers report insufficient rehab space or that rehab patients were not receiving the attention they required—indicating capacity or resource limitations in certain situations. This contradictory feedback reinforces the pattern of variable experiences depending on timing, wing, or staff assignment.
Dining, activities, and quality of life produce mixed feedback as well. While some note residents are "well fed" and there is a variety of creative activities, others say the food is poor, not diabetic-friendly, and routines can be monotonous with limited options (mainly bingo and card games and only occasional outings). Families concerned about social engagement and cognitive decline specifically mention the need for increased social interaction and more stimulating programming for mentally declining residents.
More serious concerns surface in multiple reviews: infection/quarantine incidents, reports of negligence or lack of staff knowledge, safety worries, and allegations of management misconduct including wrongful firing and even claims of illegal activities and potential shutdown threats. These are serious red flags for prospective residents and families and point to the need for transparent communication from leadership as well as potential regulatory scrutiny. While such allegations are not uniformly corroborated across reviews, their recurrence in multiple summaries warrants careful consideration.
In conclusion, Hazel Findlay appears to be a facility where positive outcomes are possible—especially in rehabilitation and where caring staff are assigned—but experiences vary considerably. Prospective residents should weigh the praised aspects (compassionate nursing, strong rehab program, family-friendly policies, nice grounds) against documented concerns (staff inconsistency, dated physical plant, AC issues, dining limitations, safety/management complaints). Practical next steps for families considering Hazel Findlay would be to tour the specific wing/room they would use, ask about current staffing levels and oversight, inspect room climate control and bed condition, review meal plans for special diets (diabetic options), inquire about infection-control history and policies, and request details on rehab capacity and recent incidents or regulatory actions. These targeted checks can help determine whether the facility’s strengths align with the prospective resident’s needs and whether the variability reported in reviews is likely to affect their expected quality of care.
