The reviews for Complete Care at Chestnut Hill present a strongly polarized picture: many families report excellent, compassionate care with standout staff and services, while a substantial minority report neglect, poor communication, lost belongings, and serious care failures. This divergence appears consistent across multiple domains — clinical care, administration, activities, dining, and facility condition — with some reviewers offering 5-star endorsements and named praise for specific staff members, and others filing complaints or planning to move loved ones out due to safety and quality concerns.
Care quality and staffing is the most recurring theme. Numerous reviewers praise caring, attentive CNAs, skilled nurses, and specific clinical leaders who provide consistent, hands-on attention. Several named staff (directors, RNs, nurses, CNAs, admissions and activities personnel) received strong positive comments for being supportive, professional, and family-centered. Many accounts describe successful rehabilitation, effective physical therapy, good coordination of appointments and transport, and staff who helped residents make meaningful progress. Conversely, an equally visible set of reviews describe neglectful or inept staff, poor clinical training, and under-staffed shifts. Serious allegations include unexplained bruises, a broken thumb, and ignored or mishandled medical issues (one reviewer cited untreated gangrene), which raise red flags about monitoring and clinical oversight in certain cases.
Communication and management are another major area of divergence. Positive reports emphasize responsive directors, clear placement explanations, and staff who keep families informed. These families describe a family-like environment where leadership is accessible and engaged. In contrast, other reviewers report unresponsive administrators, rude front-desk or admissions staff, long phone hold times, a non-functioning website, and poor intra-staff communication that leaves families in the dark about a resident’s condition. Several comments indicate frequent ownership or management changes and staff turnover, and a number of families said they have submitted official complaints — a pattern suggesting instability or uneven managerial follow-through over time.
Safety of personal belongings and resident dignity is a recurring concern. Multiple reviewers reported lost dentures, clothing, wigs, and assistive devices being misplaced or sent home, which creates practical and emotional distress for residents and families. Memory care residents are specifically called out for having minimal activities in some reports, and some families described staff neglectful behavior in memory care units. Conversely, other reviewers applaud the activities team and report meaningful programming and engagement. This inconsistency indicates that services and attention can vary significantly by unit, shift, or individual staff members.
Facility condition, dining, and amenities draw mixed feedback. Many families praise the facility’s cleanliness, bright dining rooms, remodeling efforts, and ample parking, calling the environment cheerful, well-lit, and welcoming. Housekeeping and maintenance staff are frequently commended. At the same time, there are complaints about outdated rooms, antiquated equipment, painful beds, unpleasant ventilation or hospital odors in isolated reports, and a segment of reviewers who found the food inedible or mediocre. Some reviewers highlight responsive kitchen staff who accommodated dietary changes, while others found dining quality to be a detractor from overall value.
Overall patterns: the facility appears capable of delivering high-quality, compassionate care — particularly in rehab, therapy, and when specific leaders and teams are in place — but experiences are highly inconsistent. Positive reviews emphasize visible, engaged staff, effective therapy, cleanliness, and strong administrators; negative reviews emphasize neglect, safety incidents, lost property, poor communication, understaffing, and managerial instability. Because of this polarity, prospective families should weigh the mix of strong testimonials and serious concerns. Practical steps for families considering the community include asking for recent incident and staffing reports, meeting key clinical leaders and the activities team, verifying communication protocols for updates, checking how memory care activities are structured, and confirming how the facility handles lost items, falls, and clinical escalation. These targeted inquiries will help assess whether the positive experiences reported by many are the norm now, or whether the concerning reports represent unresolved systemic issues in specific units or during particular staffing periods.
