Overall sentiment is mixed but centers on two clear patterns: strong rehabilitative, social, and everyday-care strengths, and significant, sometimes serious clinical and operational weaknesses. Many reviewers praise Evergreen Woods for its therapy programs (physical, occupational, speech), respiratory therapy availability, attentive CNAs, warm activities staff, and an environment that can be home-like and supportive. Multiple families reported good rehabilitation outcomes (wounds healed, regained ambulation with a walker), engaging activities (arts & crafts, bingo, museum outings), pet visits, and conveniences such as private rooms with internet, large bathrooms, fresh flowers in communal spaces, transportation, and family meal perks. Several reviewers singled out individual staff — therapists, CNAs, an activities director, and a nurse practitioner — as highly professional, caring, and effective. For patients and families seeking short-term rehab and social engagement, multiple accounts strongly recommend Evergreen Woods.
However, a set of serious clinical failings recurs across reviews and demands attention. The most alarming cluster concerns respiratory care: reports include improper oxygen management (oxygen tanks misused, oxygen turned up to dangerous levels), patients left unattended with oxygen attached, and failure to monitor during nebulizer treatments, with at least one instance leading to patient deterioration. Reviewers explicitly cited a lack of COPD-specific training among staff and called for a dedicated respiratory team. These are not minor complaints — they describe active patient safety risks. Alongside respiratory concerns, there are reports questioning overall medical oversight (concerns about the attending physician and ineffective communication between medical staff and social services), and at least one account of an untreated urinary tract infection followed by rapid decline and hospice placement within 30 days.
Cleanliness and personal care are other areas of inconsistency. While some reviewers found the facility clean and odor-free, others reported urine odors in hallways, dirty diapers stored in closets, and diapers left on chairs. Housekeeping and aide care were described as questionable by some families. These hygiene lapses, combined with reports of poor personal care in isolated but serious cases, contrast sharply with other accounts that praise the facility’s tidiness and attentive aides. This variability suggests inconsistent standards of care across shifts, units, or staff members rather than uniformly excellent or poor housekeeping.
Communication and management also show a split pattern. Several reviewers praised administration as easy to work with, highlighting proactive family involvement in care discussions and smooth coordination. Conversely, other reviewers reported poor communication at admission (miscommunications about placement and mental status), rude or unhelpful staff, and lack of timely information about a resident’s condition, including issues during COVID isolation. These divergent experiences point to uneven performance in administrative practices and front-line communication.
Dining and activities are generally seen as strengths, though food quality is described as mixed — many report very good meals most days while a minority found some meals unsatisfactory. The activity program is frequently praised as packed and engaging, with a notable activities director and regular outings that enhance quality of life. Facility features such as private rooms, internet, large bathrooms, and communal living spaces with personal touches contribute positively to resident experience when present.
In summary, Evergreen Woods appears to deliver strong rehabilitative services, compassionate care from many front-line staff, and an engaging social environment for many residents. At the same time, there are recurring and serious concerns about respiratory safety, clinical oversight, hygiene/personal care, and inconsistent communication. These patterns produce polarized reviews: some families report that the facility was the right choice and provided dignified, loving care, while others strongly warn against sending loved ones due to risks to medical safety and basic personal-care standards. Prospective families should weigh the facility’s demonstrable strengths in therapy and activities against the documented, high-consequence clinical issues (especially respiratory care) and seek explicit assurances about respiratory protocols, COPD training, infection monitoring, hygiene standards, and communication procedures before placement.
