Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed but leans positive on interpersonal and environmental aspects, with serious concerns raised about care practices and communication. Many reviewers praise Gateway Living for its small, home-like setup comprised of multiple separate residential houses. The physical environment is frequently described as clean, freshly painted, and carpeted, with common living spaces (living room, kitchen, dining) and outdoor seating that support a family-style atmosphere. Families and residents commonly report that the staff are friendly, caring, and attentive; several reviewers specifically call the staff "top-notch," loving, and compassionate. Long-tenured, knowledgeable employees and low staff turnover are cited as strengths that contribute to continuity of care. Reviewers also appreciate that meals and activities are provided, assisted living care levels are available as needed, pricing is reasonable, and hospice involvement is available when required. Numerous reviewers explicitly recommend the community and credit staff and management for taking good care of their loved ones.
Despite these positive notes, there are multiple, serious negative reports that create notable patterns of concern. A small but significant number of reviews allege malnutrition or starvation of a resident and claim hygiene lapses that led to a urinary tract infection. Specific examples include reports of inadequate bathing or cleaning (one report mentions a shower provided by a male caregiver with inadequate cleaning afterward) and allegations that a resident was placed on a pureed diet for an asserted choking risk when the family believed the resident could eat with proper feeding assistance. These are serious allegations about basic caregiving and nutrition. Additionally, at least one reviewer described an insensitive experience around a resident's death — receiving a cheerful death-notice call — which contributed to a perception of poor handling of end-of-life communication.
Communication and administrative reliability emerge as a recurrent operational weakness. Several reviewers recount a difficult placement experience: paperwork-related delays, a lack of confirmation or follow-up, and unresponsiveness from staff (one reviewer names an apparent contact, "Knox," in describing poor availability). Families report frustration at being insufficiently updated about their loved ones, and a poor communication pattern undermines otherwise positive impressions of the facility's staff and environment. Management receives mixed feedback — some reviewers explicitly praise owners and leadership as strong and involved, while others point to failures in communication and coordination that suggest room for operational improvement.
Facility- and comfort-related complaints are consistent enough to note: rooms are described repeatedly as very small and sometimes cramped, and environmental issues include overheating (extremely hot) and occasional urine odor. There is also mention of an unprotected outdoor smoking area close to the community, which may raise safety or comfort concerns for some families. Dining is another mixed area: while meals are included and some residents are satisfied, multiple reviewers describe food quality as variable or poor and request more meal choices. Activities are offered and a daily calendar exists, but some families note uneven engagement — activities may be available even if a particular resident has not been observed participating yet.
In sum, Gateway Living appears to offer a small-house, homelike assisted living option with many strengths in staff compassion, cleanliness in many areas, social opportunities, and reasonable cost. However, the presence of several serious allegations — malnutrition, hygiene lapses, inappropriate dietary changes, and at least one report of neglect — together with recurring operational issues around communication and placement delays, create noteworthy red flags. Prospective residents and families should weigh the generally positive interpersonal and environmental factors against these reported safety and care concerns. Recommended next steps for an evaluator or family would be to visit multiple homes on the campus, ask for documented policies and recent inspection/incident records, meet primary caregivers and leadership, inquire about staffing levels and training, request sample menus and activity schedules, and obtain references from current residents' families to better understand whether the negative reports reflect isolated incidents or systemic problems.
