Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed with a clear split between clinical and interpersonal strengths versus environmental and operational weaknesses. On the positive side, reviewers repeatedly note strong clinical care: nursing and social work staff are described as knowledgeable, attentive, and helpful. Caregivers are frequently characterized as loving and responsive, and specialized services such as rehabilitation and hospice are available and mentioned positively. Activity programming also receives consistent praise — reviewers cite a variety of daily activities (bingo, music, movies, manicures), an active activities room, and staff who engage residents, suggesting a robust calendar that supports resident engagement and quality of life.
Despite the favorable comments about care and activities, multiple reviews raise serious concerns about cleanliness and facility condition. Reports of dirty rooms and general areas, a persistent urine odor in some parts of the building, and statements that the facility at times 'smells' indicate recurring environmental hygiene issues. While some comments note that cleaning is ongoing, the persistence of these complaints suggests that cleaning efforts may be insufficient or inconsistent. Facility condition is uneven: an ongoing remodel has updated some rooms, but others remain outdated with old paint and bathrooms, producing a patchwork appearance that some reviewers find cheap or worn.
Staffing and operational themes are mixed as well. Many reviewers praise individual caregivers, nurses, and social workers for being attentive and compassionate, but other comments describe staff as rude, disorganized, or overwhelmed. The mention of a 'busy nursing station' aligns with this tension and could indicate workflow challenges or staffing shortages that impact responsiveness and organization. This dichotomy suggests variability in staff performance or differences across shifts and units, where some teams perform very well and others fall short.
Dining and food quality emerge as a notable negative. Several reviewers explicitly call the food 'nasty' or otherwise poor, which is important because dining has a direct effect on resident satisfaction and nutrition. Combined with cleanliness concerns, negative dining impressions contribute significantly to lower overall impressions for some reviewers.
In summary, reviews portray Cedar Mountain Post Acute as a facility with genuine strengths in clinical care, social work support, activity programming, and availability of rehab and hospice services. However, these strengths are tempered by recurring and specific complaints about cleanliness, odors, inconsistent room conditions due to partial remodeling, food quality, and intermittent issues with staff organization or attitude. The overall pattern suggests a facility that may provide good medical and social support but needs to address environmental maintenance, consistent housekeeping, dining quality, and operational consistency to match the level of care praised by many reviewers. Prospective residents or families should weigh the strong clinical and activity aspects against the cleanliness and dining concerns and consider an in-person tour focused on current cleanliness, recent remodel progress, staff responsiveness on the day of the visit, and meal sampling to determine whether recent improvements (if any) have addressed the documented issues.
