Overall sentiment in the reviews is strongly mixed but leans toward serious concern. Many reviewers praise the facility's rehabilitation staff and several aspects of the physical plant (a modern lobby, clean rooms, garden/courtyard and a rehab gym). However, a large and consistent set of criticisms centers on care quality, safety, staffing, and communication. Multiple reviewers described medication errors and missed or delayed medications — in several cases with severe consequences, including ambulance transfers and hospitalizations. Specific incidents cited include delays of more than 24 hours for post-surgical pain medication, missed maintenance medications, and reports of wrong medications being given. These medication problems are tied directly in reviews to clinical deterioration (UTI, pneumonia, septic shock) and emergency transports, which makes them a central and alarming pattern in the feedback.
Care quality, hygiene, and safety concerns recur throughout the reviews. Numerous accounts allege neglectful care: residents left in soiled diapers for many hours, urine-soiled linens and rooms, inadequate bathing or hygiene assistance, unclean bathroom fixtures, and skin breakdown/bedsores. Reviewers describe long call-light delays, understaffing, and unresponsiveness from nursing staff; examples include being left unrestrained in a wheelchair, delayed assistance getting out of bed, and multiple falls from bed. Several posts recount very specific safety failures (three falls by one resident, a resident released in a cab without belongings, and transfer refusals or lengthy delays). These reports, combined with allegations filed with DCF and mentions of potentially unsafe conditions, form a pattern that families should weigh heavily when considering care quality and resident safety.
Staff behavior and clinical oversight are portrayed inconsistently. Physical and rehabilitation therapy staff receive repeated positive mentions: described as great, helpful, and a highlight of the facility. Some nursing and support staff are characterized as polite and accommodating, and some reviewers point to well-trained personnel, round-the-clock care, and attentive bathing assistance. Yet equal or greater numbers of reviews describe rude, hostile, or inattentive staff, nurses arguing in public areas, yelling at residents, and poor teamwork. Physician availability and medical oversight are frequently criticized: reports include delayed doctor visits, very brief or no examinations (e.g., a five-minute exam after six days), and discharge decisions tied to doctor visits where no evaluation occurred. This inconsistent clinical oversight contributes to the safety and medication problems noted above.
Facilities and maintenance feedback is also mixed. Many reviewers praise the newer, modern look of the building, the attractive lobby and furniture, and outdoor spaces. Conversely, recurring complaints point to broken or unsafe beds (old, uneven, air mattresses malfunctioning), CRT or nonfunctional TVs, corroded bathroom fixtures, and inadequate maintenance documentation (repairs not logged or completed). Several families reported rooms that were dark due to A/C or lights being off, and others reported strong unpleasant odors (egg smell) and generally very dirty conditions. This split in facility impressions suggests variability by unit, roommate, or patient assignment, or possibly changes over time or between shifts.
Dining, nutrition, and therapy time draw repeated criticism. Multiple reviewers called the food "awful," complained that the kitchen was closed at times, and said specialized diets (GERD diets) were not followed. Yet the presence of an on-site nutritionist was noted as a positive in some reviews. Therapy is widely described as the facility's strong point, but reviewers also report limited therapy time, denied therapy requests, and a perception that the company prioritizes cost-cutting over adequate therapy hours. Shower or hygiene therapy limitations (one hour per day) and limited availability of therapy slots were specifically mentioned.
Management, communication, and policy issues are a major theme. Reviews cite poor communication between staff and families, nurse unavailability, and difficulty obtaining progress or medical information. Several reviewers recounted being told discharge or transfer would occur contingent on a doctor visit that then did not happen, leading to prolonged stays or worsening conditions. There are allegations of management refusing or delaying transfers and reports that complaints resulted in charges or regulatory involvement (DCF). Language accessibility is also a concern: lack of Spanish-speaking staff was noted. Finally, reviewers describe the facility as understaffed and under-resourced, sometimes characterizing care as the bare minimum or likening the atmosphere to a 'warehouse' for older residents.
Taken together, the reviews present a polarized picture: a facility with notable strengths in rehabilitation and some attractive, modern spaces, but with widespread, serious concerns about nursing care reliability, medication safety, hygiene, staffing levels, and management communication. The most frequent and severe themes are medication errors leading to hospital transfer, neglect/hygiene lapses, and understaffing with slow response times—issues that have immediate implications for resident safety. Families considering this facility should weigh the strong rehabilitation program and some positive staff reports against the multiple, specific safety and care-quality complaints documented by numerous reviewers.
