Overall sentiment for St. Andrew's at New Florence is highly mixed, with strong praise for certain caregiving staff juxtaposed against persistent and serious concerns about cleanliness, maintenance, staffing responsiveness, and management culture. Multiple reviewers describe the staff who provide direct care as compassionate, attentive, and personal — several go so far as to say residents are treated like family and name individual employees (for example, Marsha) as exemplars of excellent care. These positive reports highlight friendly, knowledgeable caregivers, individualized attention, and in some cases exceptional nursing care. Some reviewers also note positive aspects of the environment such as on-site amenities (library, game rooms), reasonable pricing relative to newer facilities, and satisfactory meals and clean rooms in certain circumstances.
However, an equally strong set of negative themes recurs across many reviews, and these concerns are substantive. Cleanliness and housekeeping problems are repeatedly cited: rooms reportedly were not cleaned at move-in, carpets were not shampooed or vacuumed, bathrooms and sinks had hair and dust, and personal items from previous residents (including dentures and used bathroom items) were left behind. Several reviews report odors (notably urine) and visible maintenance issues such as rusted floor heaters, overgrown landscaping, and a generally dark or unkempt appearance. These facility- and hygiene-related problems contribute to perceptions of poor quality and raise legitimate infection control and safety concerns.
Staffing and care responsiveness form another central theme with highly polarized accounts. While many reviewers praise particular nurses and caregivers for kindness and skill, other reviewers describe uncaring behaviors: nurses who fail to assist with bathroom needs, staff who stand around talking rather than responding to residents, and slow or ignored call lights. This inconsistency suggests variability in staff performance or uneven staffing levels/shifts. Several reviews explicitly state that residents experienced loneliness owing to few activities and limited social engagement, which compounds the negative impact of slow responses and uncaring interactions.
Management, communication, and culture are also prominent problem areas mentioned across reviews. Several people reported poor communication and coordination by nursing leadership, defensive or closed-door management responses when concerns were raised, and a perceived lack of transparency. Some reviews allege that issues are swept under the rug and describe hostile or discriminatory behavior by certain staff (including allegations of racist or hateful conduct). These managerial and cultural criticisms intensify distrust and make it difficult for families to feel confident that problems will be addressed effectively.
Dining and activities receive mixed feedback. A number of reviewers praise the food and say meals are appropriate to residents' needs, while others describe the food as processed and not home-cooked. Activities are described as limited in some reviews, contributing to resident loneliness; yet the presence of a library and game rooms is a positive point that indicates potential for engagement if programming is expanded.
Value and facility quality are perceived inconsistently. Some reviewers appreciate the facility as less expensive than newer, upscale homes and feel it provides good value when the caregiving staff are strong. Others feel the pricing is outrageous given the cleanliness and maintenance problems, and they explicitly do not recommend the facility. The pattern across reviews is of a facility that can deliver excellent, compassionate individual care in many instances but suffers from recurring operational, cleanliness, and management failures that undermine overall quality.
Recommendation: Prospective residents and families should weigh the strong positive reports about individual caregivers and nursing staff against the consistent concerns about housekeeping, maintenance, responsiveness, and management culture. If considering St. Andrew's, ask for recent inspection reports, verify housekeeping and maintenance protocols, inquire about staff-to-resident ratios and call-light response times, request references from current families, and meet direct-care staff during different shifts to assess consistency. Given the allegations around management defensiveness and serious cultural issues, document conversations and get commitments in writing about remediation steps before moving a loved one in. The facility may be a good fit for families who prioritize compassionate direct-care staff and lower cost, but the hygiene, maintenance, responsiveness, and transparency issues reported by multiple reviewers are important red flags that warrant careful investigation.
