The reviews present a sharply mixed and sometimes polarized picture of Ascension Living Saint Anne Place. Several reviewers praise the staff as compassionate and caring, note that specific residents received very good or even wonderful care, and describe the facility as clean and pleasant. Hospice situations are mentioned positively, with good care provided during end-of-life services. These positive comments indicate that there are clearly staff members and situations where the facility meets or exceeds family expectations.
At the same time, numerous and serious concerns recur across the summaries. The most prominent negative theme is staffing: reviewers repeatedly report that the facility is understaffed, that staff are overworked, and that there may be no staff coverage on weekends. Related to staffing shortfalls are allegations of inadequate personal care — including explicit reports that no personal care was offered to some residents — and neglect of basic hygiene such as soiled diapers left unchanged. Several reviews single out bedridden residents as particularly vulnerable to these problems, citing neglect and lack of attention. Taken together, these comments point to systemic operational issues that directly affect resident wellbeing.
Dining and daily living services are also criticized. Multiple reviewers describe meals as cold and nasty, which suggests problems either with food preparation, meal service logistics, or staffing at mealtimes. While dining complaints are less detailed than the hygiene and staffing concerns, they contribute to an overall narrative of inconsistent day-to-day care quality.
Management and organizational consistency are another recurring theme. Reviewers note inconsistent management practices and uneven application of care standards. This inconsistency helps explain the polarized experiences: some families report outstanding, attentive care (including positive hospice care) while others report serious lapses. The contrast implies that resident experiences may depend heavily on which staff are on duty, which shifts are covered, or which managers are overseeing care at a given time.
In sum, the reviews indicate a facility with strengths — notably individual caregivers who are compassionate, clean facilities in certain areas, and competent hospice care — but also with significant and recurring weaknesses. The dominant concerns are understaffing, overworked employees, hygiene and personal-care neglect (especially for immobile or bed‑ridden residents), poor meal quality, and inconsistent management. These issues appear serious enough to materially affect resident comfort and safety for some families, even while other families report satisfactory or even excellent care. The pattern suggests variability in care delivery rather than uniformly good or uniformly poor performance.
