Overall sentiment in the reviews for Susquehanna Nursing & Rehabilitation Center is highly polarized and inconsistent. A substantial subset of reviewers praise the rehab programs, specific therapists, and individual frontline caregivers who delivered compassionate and effective care; these accounts describe successful short-term rehabilitation, attentive nursing and therapy staff, clean well-kept areas, engaging activities, and positive family interactions. At the same time, a large and persistent set of complaints describes systemic problems: chronic understaffing, cleanliness and infection-control failures, poor food and nutrition management, medication and care errors, hostile or unprofessional staff behavior, and managerial unresponsiveness. The result is a facility where individual experiences range from excellent rehabilitation and dedicated staff to reports of neglect, serious clinical harm, and distressing living conditions.
Care quality and clinical safety are major points of concern in many reviews. Numerous accounts detail missed or delayed medications, omitted personal care such as showers and oral hygiene, neglected diabetic/podiatric care, urinary tract infections left untreated, IV and line issues, and in several severe cases infections or declines that reviewers associate with neglect. There are multiple mentions of weight loss, falls, dehydration risk, and even deaths (including COVID-related deaths) where families felt communication and documentation from physicians or administration was inadequate. Conversely, many reviewers specifically single out the physical and occupational therapy teams as exemplary, crediting them with clear functional improvements and good discharge transitions. This split suggests that rehabilitative services may be comparatively stronger than some elements of routine nursing and personal care, but that overall medical oversight and consistent nursing practice are uneven.
Staffing, staff behavior, and variability of caregiver performance are recurrent themes. A dominant pattern is understaffing: reviewers report insufficient staff on each floor, long delays for help with toileting or transfers, and episodes where residents were left in bed or unattended for prolonged periods. This under-resourcing is linked by families to a cascade of problems: missed feedings, unemptied trash, failure to change linens, and rushed or superficial care. In addition to staffing shortages, many reviewers recount rude, hostile, or unprofessional conduct — from foul language and yelling to accusations and harassment of family members who advocated for residents. At the same time, numerous reviews praise specific aides, nurses, and therapists by name for going above and beyond; this further highlights the facility’s pronounced variability where individual caregivers may provide excellent care amid a system that often fails to support them.
Facility condition and housekeeping receive mixed assessments but lean negative overall. Several reviews describe rooms and common areas as dirty, with floors not swept, stains or urine on bedding, baseboards with grime, and poor laundry handling. Other reviewers report the facility as clean, updated, and homey, indicating that conditions may vary by wing, time period, or housekeeping assignment. Infection-control concerns are notable: reports of COVID patients on the same floor as other residents, MRSA/pneumonia exposures, and inadequate air conditioning are present and amplify family anxiety around health and safety. Physical environment complaints also include cramped two-bed rooms, outdated décor, and limited communal space, though some praise the courtyard and river view.
Dining and nutrition come up frequently as problem areas. Many reviewers describe meals as cold, disgusting, or overcooked, with insufficient assistance for residents who need help eating. Reports of dropped trays and residents being left unfed are serious and recurring. A smaller number of reviewers enjoyed the food and described meals as good, but the dominant impression is that dining services are inconsistent and often inadequate, especially for dependent residents.
Activities, social engagement, and rehabilitation programming show a split. Several families praised an engaging activities department, games, and light exercise, and attributed good quality-of-life outcomes to those programs. Many positive comments also note strong rehab planning and therapists who achieve measurable recovery. Conversely, other reviewers reported minimal activities (sometimes only two per day), no activity director, and a general sense that residents lacked meaningful engagement. This inconsistency mirrors the broader pattern of variable staffing and program quality.
Management, communication, and administrative practices are recurring sources of frustration. Complaints include unresponsive administration, unanswered phone calls and voicemails, poor discharge planning (missing equipment, inadequate aftercare instructions), billing opacity, upfront large fees, and Medicare disputes. Families describe instances where discharge was mishandled — residents left without wheelchairs, oxygen, or packed belongings — and where social work or case management failed to coordinate necessary supports. There are also repeated calls for regulatory oversight: multiple reviewers indicated filing complaints or prompting state inspections.
Patterns and notable concerns: The reviews collectively suggest two important patterns. First, the facility appears to have pockets of genuine clinical and caregiving excellence, particularly in rehabilitation and among certain named therapists and aides. Second, those positive pockets coexist with systemic failures—especially staffing, cleanliness, communication, dining, and managerial accountability—that produce frequent negative experiences and, in some reports, serious clinical harm. The frequency and severity of negative accounts (including infections, weight loss, medication errors, and deaths) raise significant safety and quality-of-care concerns that warrant attention from families and regulators.
In summary, prospective families should expect highly variable care at Susquehanna Nursing & Rehabilitation Center. If strong physical rehabilitation and the possibility of attentive individual caregivers are priorities, some reviewers found the facility achieved those goals. However, the prevalence of reports about understaffing, unsafe or neglectful care practices, poor hygiene, dining failures, and problematic administration indicates substantial risk. Families considering this facility should ask specific, concrete questions about staffing levels, infection control procedures, recent survey/inspection results, medication administration protocols, discharge planning processes, and how the facility handles family complaints. They should also seek to meet and evaluate the therapy team and frontline caregivers directly, and consider visiting multiple times and at different hours to assess consistency of care and cleanliness before making placement decisions.
