Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed to negative, characterized by strong praise for a core group of regular staff and the rehabilitation/therapy program, alongside serious and repeated concerns about staffing consistency, care reliability, and safety. Many reviewers singled out named employees (Nicole, Tiara, Will, Darma, Sharisse) and daytime CNAs and nurses as compassionate, competent, and effective. Rehab services receive frequent positive mention — described as “awesome” or “strong” — and the facility is often described as clean, with an engaged manager, active resident programming, and useful infrastructure such as a backup generator. These positives form a consistent theme: when regular staff and rehab teams are present and engaged, families observe good, attentive care and a tidy environment.
Counterbalancing those positives are recurrent, serious operational problems that multiple reviews flagged. A dominant pattern is the heavy use of agency (temporary) staff, with numerous reports that agency caregivers are careless, lazy, or uncaring compared with regular employees. This inconsistency in staffing appears to contribute to lapses in basic care: long call-light delays (commonly reported as two to three-plus hours), long waits for simple items like ice or clean linens, and insufficient hydration. Reviewers reported occasions where family members had to fetch linens or provide basic care themselves. One particularly serious cited incident involved a medication error and subsequent unresponsiveness after morning medications; reviewers also described pharmacy/service deficiencies that led to residents receiving too many doses, a problem reported to have occurred about five months earlier. These clinical-safety concerns are compounded by reports of extremely thin nursing coverage (one nurse for about 30 patients), which reviewers linked to delays and missed care.
Behavioral and cultural issues are another recurring theme. Several reviewers reported rude or unprofessional conduct from administrators and some staff — especially night-shift CNAs — including yelling, arguing, and making accusations. While daytime CNAs and certain named individuals were viewed positively, the night shift and some agency staff were repeatedly described as rude or neglectful. Reviewers also reported that some staff appear to be socializing on shifts rather than providing care, which ties back into concerns about neglect and lack of basic attention. A small number of reviewers explicitly called the environment unsafe for their loved ones and stated that the facility should be shut down, indicating a high level of distress among affected families.
Therapy and rehabilitation were highlighted as strengths overall: therapy staff were described positively and as a bright spot in resident care. However, a few reviewers noted slow engagement from the therapy department in individual cases (one therapist was slow to start but later described as nice). Food service and dietary management drew mixed feedback: some found meals acceptable, but others reported that meals were not appropriate for diabetic diets and that the food service was hit-or-miss. The physical plant is described as older, but clean and maintained, with a hospital-like feel and an odor-free environment. Regular department meetings about patients and an engaged manager were noted as positive organizational signs.
A particularly alarming cluster of comments concerns resident safety and outcomes: one reviewer reported seven deaths in a four-week period, and others cited medication and hydration problems that suggest systemic care gaps. While the reviews contain strong praise for particular caregivers and departments, these safety-related reports signal patterns that need urgent attention. Taken together, the reviews portray a facility with clear strengths in therapy, a caring core of regular staff, and solid cleanliness and infrastructure — but with inconsistent coverage, problematic reliance on agency staff, communication and behavioral issues among some personnel, and several clinically significant incidents (medication errors, hydration neglect, long response times) that raise meaningful concerns about resident safety and quality of care.
