Overall sentiment for Ohman Family Living at Blossom is highly mixed and polarized: many reviewers describe outstanding, compassionate care, particularly in short-term rehab and from specific frontline staff, while a substantial number of reviews allege serious lapses in long-term care quality, neglect, and problematic management. The facility appears to have strong points — notably an engaged activities program, effective therapy services, and several individually praised staff members — but these positives coexist with recurring concerns about inconsistent staffing, hygiene, communication, and clinical safety.
Care quality and clinical safety: Reviews cluster into two distinct experiences. Numerous families praise the clinical and therapy teams, describing "top-notch" medical and therapy groups, efficient rehab stays, and diligent nurses who communicate well and respond quickly to call lights. Conversely, other reviewers describe long-term care episodes marked by neglect: residents left soiled, severe skin breakdown, falls not properly monitored, slow nurse responses, and insufficient attention from management. These latter reports include serious safety and quality-of-care allegations that contrast sharply with accounts of "exceptional" care. The divergence suggests variability in care depending on unit, staff on duty, or time period.
Staff and management: Many reviews repeatedly highlight compassionate, attentive aides and nurses and single out staff members for exceptional service (social worker Lori, nurse Amanda, and several activities staff). Families frequently note friendly, helpful admissions and therapy staff, responsiveness from social services (in some cases arranged follow-up appointments), and an activities team that is energetic and resident-focused. However, a strong countercurrent of reviews accuses management and some office staff of being rude or money-focused. There are serious allegations related to the owner (named in reviews) including abusive behavior and manipulation of reviews — these are presented as allegations from reviewers and former employees rather than verified facts within the review dataset. Several reports also describe staff absenteeism, inconsistent caregivers due to agency use, and staff using personal cellphones while providing care. The net picture is one of uneven leadership impact and high variability in staff behavior and reliability.
Facilities and environment: Multiple reviewers praise the facility as clean, well-maintained, and restful with a rural setting, private rooms (some with private bathrooms), and pleasant outdoor grounds with walking paths. Other reviewers, however, report small or dirty rooms, urine odors in parts of the building, and some outdated areas. There are also consistent notes that many rooms are double-occupancy with only some single rooms available — a practical detail families should confirm. The website purportedly contains inaccuracies about room offerings and meal arrangements according to several reviewers, so families may want to verify advertised features in person.
Dining, activities, and quality-of-life: Activities receive steady positive marks: organized outings, trips to shows, in-house activities, and a cooking area that promotes independence are frequently cited. The activities director and staff are described as engaged and create a family-like atmosphere. Dining feedback is mixed — some appreciate flexible dining options and pleasant meals, while others call the food "hit-or-miss." The presence of guest areas and options to dine in-room or in the dining room is viewed positively where available.
Communication and transitions: Several reviewers commend the facility for thorough communication from admission through discharge and for social work support (again, many praise Lori specifically). But other reviews note poor communication, slow responses from social work or nursing, and difficulty getting reliable information about the resident's status. This inconsistency in communication is one of the recurring themes that contributes to the polarized perceptions.
Notable patterns and risk signals: The most important pattern is inconsistency. Many positive reviews and staff-specific accolades coexist with allegations of serious neglect, inadequate staffing, and unprofessional behavior. Repeated mentions of agency staff and inconsistent caregivers, combined with reports of slow response times and missed basic care tasks, are red flags for families prioritizing safety and continuity of care. Allegations of abuse and review manipulation are serious; they warrant further verification through state inspection reports and direct conversations with management.
Bottom line: Ohman Family Living at Blossom appears to provide excellent rehabilitation and compassionate care in many recorded experiences, supported by an active activities program and several standout staff members. At the same time, multiple independent reviews raise substantial safety, staffing, hygiene, and management concerns for some long-term residents. Given this polarized picture, prospective families should (1) request and review recent state inspection and complaint records, (2) tour the specific unit where their loved one would reside, (3) ask about staffing levels, use of agency staff, and nurse call response times, (4) meet key clinical and social work staff (ask whether Lori is available), and (5) verify room assignments, meal plans, and infection-control practices in person. These steps will help assess whether the positive elements reported align with a prospective resident’s needs and whether the negative patterns have been addressed.
