Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but frequently polarized: many families and residents praise the frontline caregiving staff, activities, and clinical resources, while others report serious safety, management, and administrative issues that significantly diminish trust. The most consistent positive themes are the compassion and skill of caregivers and therapists, an active and well-run activities program, and on-site clinical supports (including an on-site doctor five days per week and specialty care for conditions like Parkinson’s). Several reviewers describe exceptional rehabilitation outcomes, strong daily engagement opportunities (music, cooking, outings, movie theater), good food, and a calm, loving environment created by particular nurses and CNAs. Features such as a fenced yard, enclosed grounds, pet therapy, and facility amenities (pool, wood shop, theater) are repeatedly cited as assets that enrich residents’ lives.
However, these positives are frequently counterbalanced by recurring operational and safety concerns. A number of reviews report high cost and additional fees that surprised families (examples cited include a $4,000 admin fee and daily incontinent-care charges), and some reviewers feel the community prioritizes revenue over individualized care. Staff shortages and high CNA workloads are mentioned repeatedly; families say this leads to limited personal interaction, delayed responses to needs, and occasional lapses in basic care. There are multiple, serious accounts of medication mishaps (including narcotics being mixed up between residents), missing or delayed medications, and inadequate monitoring after medication changes leading to dizziness and falls. At least one reviewer reported a fall that resulted in a fractured bone and an ER visit, and others described delayed identification of pneumonia and poor wound care. These safety and clinical quality incidents are among the most damaging themes in the reviews.
Management and corporate responsiveness are another major area of divergence. While some reviewers find administration helpful and praise specific managers and the on-site doctor (Dr. Steve Fehlauer and others are positively mentioned), others describe declining management quality after ownership or operator changes, slow responses from directors, and what they view as defensive or unhelpful corporate processes. Promises about private rooms, room placement, and transfers have sometimes not been honored, causing family frustration. Operational issues such as broken air conditioning, spotty heat, pool closures, and ongoing remodeling have affected resident comfort; some attribute these to aging infrastructure and delays in parts or renovation timelines. Additional administrative problems include lost belongings, clothing mislabeling, and slow returns of personal items.
On the experiential side, the facility often scores high for activities, community feel, housekeeping (for many families), and social engagement. Many reviewers emphasize that the staff 'aren't in a hurry,' that they form family-like bonds with residents, and that residents are active and happy in group programs. Rehabilitation and therapy programs receive strong endorsements in multiple reviews, and families credit the team with meaningful recovery and increased mobility. Conversely, some families find the building large and confusing, note concerns about keeping track of residents (especially in memory care), or feel the community is not intimate enough for their loved ones. There are also mixed reports about whether the memory care has an ideal setting in the facility; some state memory care is a focus and effective, while others cite concerns about monitoring and safety for those residents.
In summary, the Auberge at Aspen Park (sometimes referred to alongside Silverado in reviews) presents a complicated picture: it offers many high-quality elements — attentive caregivers, a robust activity calendar, rehab and medical resources on-site, and attractive grounds and amenities — that families deeply appreciate. At the same time, operational, clinical safety, and administrative problems reported by multiple reviewers are significant and cannot be ignored. If evaluating this community, prospective families should weigh the strong praise for front-line staff and programming against the documented incidents of medication errors, falls, lost belongings, inconsistent management responsiveness, and extra fees. Practical next steps for a family would include: touring multiple times to assess staffing levels and resident interaction across shifts; asking directly about staffing ratios, fall protocols, medication management procedures, and recent incidents; clarifying all fees and bed/room assignment guarantees in writing; and requesting references from current families whose needs match the prospective resident (memory care, heavy nursing, rehab). That approach will help determine whether the community’s praised caregiving strengths are reliable and whether the administrative and safety concerns have been addressed to the family’s satisfaction.
