Ohio Living Mount Pleasant elicits strongly mixed reviews with distinct patterns: many reviewers praise the independent and assisted living components, therapy/rehab teams, and the strong community feel, while repeated and serious concerns surface about staffing, skilled nursing care, cleanliness, safety, and financial transparency. Overall sentiment is polarized — families and residents describe either very positive, home-like experiences with engaged staff and good therapy outcomes, or distressing accounts of neglect, unsafe conditions, and poor management responsiveness.
Care quality and staffing: A dominant theme is chronic understaffing and uneven staff performance. Numerous reviewers report too few nurses and aides, minimal front-desk coverage, delayed or non-responsive call-button responses, and aides distracted by cell phones. Where staffing is adequate, families describe caring, professional nurses and quick responses to injuries; where it is not, reviewers recount residents being ignored for bathroom assistance, left in chairs for long periods, or experiencing falls. Several severe safety incidents are described, including falls and at least one reported subdural hematoma, which heightens concern about supervision and fall-prevention protocols. Reviewers also reported differential care depending on payment source (Medicaid vs full-pay), with perceptions that full-pay residents receive better attention and surroundings.
Medical management and neglect: Medication administration and clinical oversight are repeatedly criticized in multiple reviews. Specific allegations include overmedicating with morphine, inappropriate sedation with Seroquel, and unprofessional handling of Xanax and other medications. These reports are coupled with accounts of residents who were not fed, left unawakened, or confined in recliners—raising red flags about clinical monitoring in the skilled and memory-care units. Conversely, some families praise the nursing leadership and cite excellent, compassionate care, indicating inconsistent standards across units or shifts.
Cleanliness, hygiene, and facility condition: Several reviewers describe alarming hygiene and cleanliness issues in skilled-care areas: crumbs, open rotting fruit in rooms, laundry piled up, and even fecal residue on shoes. Other reviewers, however, report consistently clean residences and facilities. This inconsistency extends to facility condition: some areas and cottages are described as well-kept, homey, and individually designed, while rehab and long-term care wings are criticized as old, depressing, and in need of remodeling. Issues such as ceiling tiles torn out, poor room condition, and delayed snow removal (creating fall risks) were also mentioned.
Therapy, activities, and community life: One of the most commonly praised aspects is the active programming and therapy/rehab services. Many reviewers note an engaged activity director, plentiful activities, fitness/gym resources with a professional coach, and an active, friendly resident community. These elements contribute to a home-like, supportive atmosphere for independent and assisted living residents. Several families specifically credit the on-site therapy teams with helping loved ones recover and return home, and recommend the rehab services highly.
Dining and daily living: Reports on dining are mixed. Some reviewers appreciate a pleasant dining area and accommodating service; others complain about bland food, limited menu choices, or poor food presentation in certain units. Laundry and belongings management problems were cited by multiple reviewers, with complaints of piled-up laundry and difficulties retrieving or transferring personal items. Personal grooming lapses were also reported in several negative accounts.
Management, billing, and governance: Financial and administrative concerns recur: unexpected fees (for example, packing charges), suspicious monthly prebills, rate increases without early notification, and pressure to donate or participate in fundraising. Some reviewers describe estate and access-to-funds disputes following resident deaths. On the other hand, a few reviewers complimented transparent pricing, helpful move-in staff, and honest communication about costs. Management responsiveness is inconsistent in reviews—some families praise excellent communication and follow-up; others report rude administrators and unresolved complaints.
Memory care and skilled nursing variability: Memory care is a split area in the reviews. Some families report attentive, kind staff and worry-free experiences in memory units; others describe neglect, residents confined and unawakened, or general poor care. Skilled nursing receives more negative commentary overall, with descriptions of depressing environments, confinement in recliners, and under-resourced staffing. The removal of agency nurses was noted as a positive change by some reviewers, suggesting staffing model changes can impact care quality.
Safety, accessibility, and other operational concerns: Beyond staffing and cleanliness, reviews raised practical safety and accessibility issues: mailbox placement requiring residents to walk near streets, snow not cleared promptly causing fall risk, and accessibility hurdles around campus. Additionally, COVID-era visitation restrictions were mentioned as a negative factor for family access. Isolated but serious accusations such as racist or discriminatory staff behavior also appeared and are notable for families who prioritize cultural safety.
Overall assessment and patterns: Ohio Living Mount Pleasant appears to be a large, mixed-quality campus where experiences vary widely depending on unit, shift, and payer status. Independent and assisted living components, social programming, and therapy/rehab services receive the most consistent praise. Skilled nursing and long-term care areas show the most concerning patterns: understaffing, inconsistent hygiene, safety incidents, and medication management issues. Administrative and billing practices generate distrust in some families, while others find transparent, helpful onboarding. Prospective residents and families should weigh the documented strengths (therapy, activities, community, some very caring staff and well-kept homes) against recurring and serious negatives (staffing shortfalls, safety incidents, hygiene lapses, and billing/communication concerns). Visiting multiple times, asking for unit-specific staffing ratios, reviewing recent inspection reports, and seeking written clarification on fees and billing practices are advisable before committing.
