Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed, with a substantial number of reviewers reporting strong, positive experiences with staff, therapies, and activities, while a smaller but significant group reports serious deficiencies in care, cleanliness, and customer service. Multiple reviewers praised the facility for 24/7 care coverage, attentive and compassionate staff, and effective rehabilitation services (PT/OT) that helped residents regain mobility. Positive accounts highlight a warm, family-like environment, well-trained personnel, an odor-free and well-maintained building, and supportive ancillary services such as a dietitian who helped restore appetite. Several reviews also noted spacious rooms, security/sign-in procedures, an improving and varied meal program, and an active pre-COVID activity calendar including chair yoga, choirs, bingo, music, art, and spiritual services. The facility's local recognition (a feature on WSB Channel 2) was also mentioned as a positive sign of community standing.
At the same time, a number of reviewers reported concerning negative experiences that point to inconsistency in service quality. Specific allegations include poor nursing, residents being barely fed or attended to only when visitors are present, and accounts of patients feeling abandoned when they lack visitors. Some reviewers described customer service and management as unresponsive or unable to answer questions accurately. Physical plant issues were raised as well: while some said the facility was clean and odor-free, others called it outdated, in need of refurbishment, or noted that the courtyard looked horrible. There was at least one report of no beds being available at a time of inquiry. These conflicting reports suggest variability in performance that may depend on unit, shift, staff turnover, or timing (for example, pre- versus post-COVID conditions).
Activities and social programming receive generally positive mention for the period before COVID-19, with multiple references to diverse offerings (choirs, exercise, religious services, games, performers, art, and more). Reviewers also noted that COVID interrupted these activities, and some indicate that programming had not fully returned to its former level. Dining feedback is similarly mixed: some family members report meals improving and residents enjoying them, while other reviews imply inadequate attention to feeding or meal oversight in certain cases.
Staffing and safety are recurrent themes with divergent impressions. Many reviewers describe staff as caring, attentive, and pleasant; others describe poor nurses and inadequate care, particularly for residents without visitors. Security and sign-in staff were specifically praised in some accounts, indicating some procedural safeguards. The presence of successful therapy outcomes (residents discharged walking with a walker after arriving in a wheelchair) and dietitian intervention are concrete positives that some families experienced. However, allegations of minimal nurse presence and neglect are serious and appeared in multiple summaries.
Management and customer service emerge as potential areas of concern. While some reviewers found managers and front-line staff helpful and knowledgeable, other reviewers explicitly called out poor customer service and an inability of managers to answer basic questions. This inconsistency suggests that prospective residents and families should verify current management practices, staff continuity, and responsiveness during a visit.
Notable patterns and practical implications: the reviews indicate strong strengths in therapy, some consistent evidence of compassionate caregiving, and historically robust activity programming. At the same time, variability in experiences — particularly around nursing attentiveness, meal assistance, cleanliness, and facility upkeep — is prominent. For prospective residents or families: schedule an in-person visit that includes observing a mealtime and a therapy session, ask about bed availability, inquire specifically about recent staffing levels and turnover, request examples of current activity programming post-COVID, and ask for references from recent families. Overall, Sadie G. Mays Health & Rehabilitation Center appears capable of providing high-quality rehabilitation and compassionate care for many residents, but the inconsistent reports warrant careful, current verification by anyone considering placement.
