Overall sentiment in these reviews is strongly negative despite a few comments about the facility’s cleanliness and lack of odors. Multiple reviewers emphasize that the building itself appears nice and clean, but this positive surface impression is repeatedly overshadowed by serious care and safety concerns. The pattern described is one of residents arriving in relatively good condition (one reviewer specifically notes an initially walking and talking family member) and then experiencing significant decline after admission.
Care quality and clinical safety are the most prominent and alarming themes. Reviewers report multiple types of medical failures: infectious disease problems (VRE, C. difficile, and urinary tract infections), dehydration, and acute injuries such as a wrist fracture and an associated wrist drop. Medication management errors are called out explicitly, including an incorrect Coumadin dose, and there are reports of poor diabetes management related to diet. These items together indicate systemic lapses in clinical oversight, monitoring, and basic nursing care that have tangible, harmful outcomes for residents.
Staff behavior and interpersonal dynamics with families are another consistent concern. Several summaries describe staff as abusive or uncaring, and reviewers report deception in dealing with residents who have dementia. Families also describe anxiety and a breakdown of trust with staff and management. Compounding this, reviewers say that management and staff are not equipped to mediate disputes over guardianship or power of attorney; such matters were reportedly resolved outside the facility rather than handled collaboratively on site. This points to deficiencies in communication, family engagement, and administrative responsiveness.
The facility environment yields mixed impressions. On the positive side, multiple reviewers note that the building is very clean and has no unpleasant smells, which suggests housekeeping and environmental services are functioning well. On the negative side, there are reports that residents are kept locked in hallways and have no access to nature or community activities. That restriction on movement and lack of outdoor or community access contributes to reduced quality of life and raises concerns about resident autonomy and programming.
Cost and reputation are additional issues. Reviewers describe the monthly cost as high while simultaneously characterizing the care as unsafe and substandard. Several reviewers explicitly state the facility has a poor reputation and advise others to avoid it. The combination of high expense with reported clinical and interpersonal failures intensifies dissatisfaction and frustration among families.
In summary, the reviews paint a picture of a facility with a clean and pleasant physical environment but with serious shortcomings in clinical care, staff conduct, family communication, resident freedom, and administrative competence. The most frequent, significant problem themes are infection control lapses, medical and dietary mismanagement (including medication errors), physical injuries and decline after admission, and troubling staff behavior toward vulnerable residents. Families’ trust appears consistently eroded, and reviewers recommend avoiding the facility despite its clean appearance. Any prospective resident or family should weigh the facility’s cleanliness against the repeated reports of unsafe care, and should seek thorough, up-to-date information on clinical staffing, infection control practices, incident reporting, and family communication before committing to placement.
