Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly mixed, with a wide gulf between reviewers who experienced attentive, professional care and those who reported severe neglect and safety failures. Positive reports highlight a generally clean facility with pleasant outdoor spaces, screened lanais, and sidewalks for walking. Many reviewers praised the social programming — frequent activities, a Friday Happy Hour with live music, and an active dining environment. Several accounts noted that meals looked and tasted good and that the dining room presented well. For some residents, clinical services were strong: physical therapy and rehabilitation were singled out as excellent experiences by multiple reviewers, and hospice care was described as the best part of the stay in at least one detailed account. There are also reports of courteous tour staff, smooth transfers, immaculate rooms for some, and staff who were professional, caring, and exceeded expectations in particular cases.
However, a substantial number of reviews raise serious, recurring concerns about safety, staffing, and consistency of care. Multiple reviewers described understaffing and limited visible staff; several incidents involve residents left unattended in wheelchairs for hours without water or assistance, missed hygiene for days, and an unattended 88-year-old patient with no CNA present. There are specific and severe allegations including a resident unshowered for three days with no food or water leading to ER admission for UTI and sepsis, multiple falls (four falls cited in one report), and at least one patient death tied to care delays. These reports culminated in families filing complaints with the Ombudsman, Adult Protective Services, and the state Agency for Healthcare Administration. The presence of such high-severity events suggests that while care can be very good at times, lapses can be catastrophic when staffing, communication, or procedures break down.
Communication and family engagement are recurring negative themes. Several reviewers said they received little or no updates on medications, rehab progress, or condition changes; families felt isolated and frustrated by limited technology options for remote contact. There are also allegations of misleading COVID bed reporting and criticism of delayed hospital transfers that increased risk to residents. Infection-control and emergency responsiveness receive mixed marks: some reviewers say management was responsive to COVID and emergencies, while others allege misleading reporting and policies that limited family access.
Facility condition and atmosphere are similarly described in both positive and negative terms. Some reviewers find the facility clean, with nice outdoor spaces and private accommodations; others call the building dated, dark, and dreary, note small rooms that are not welcoming, and express cleanliness concerns. Private rooms are not universally available, and where rooms are small or hospital-like, reviewers perceived a less home-like, more clinical environment.
Policy and medication issues also appear. A number of reviewers criticized perceived heavy-handed policies around vaccination and masking, framing them as restrictive or coercive rather than medically necessary. Several reports raise medication concerns including over-medication, slow response to needs, risk of injury, and mishandling of narcotics prescriptions — in at least one case prompting plans for formal complaint. Cost and rules are additional negatives for some: reviewers called the facility expensive and cited restrictive policies such as a no-alcohol rule.
Taken together, the pattern is one of inconsistent quality: some patients receive excellent, attentive care, strong rehabilitation, and supportive staff, while others experience neglect, serious safety incidents, and poor communication. This inconsistency suggests potential variability by unit, shift, or individual staff members, and it highlights the importance for prospective residents and families to do careful due diligence. Recommended steps for anyone considering Solaris Healthcare Charlotte Harbor include touring at different times of day to observe staffing levels, asking for recent inspection or complaint histories and how those were resolved, requesting specifics on nurse/CNA ratios and protocols for falls, transfers, and medication management, clarifying family communication policies and technology availability, verifying hospice/rehab outcomes, and confirming availability of private rooms and infection-control reporting practices. The facility shows strengths in activities, some clinical programs, and certain staff and hospice services, but the documented serious adverse events and repeated concerns about understaffing and lack of consistent communication are significant red flags that warrant careful investigation before making placement decisions.
