Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized: many families and patients report excellent rehabilitation outcomes, a clean bright facility, and compassionate individual caregivers, while a substantial number of reviews describe serious lapses in medical care, staffing, communication, and safety. The most consistent positive theme is the strength of the rehab teams — physical and occupational therapists are repeatedly praised as professional, motivating, and instrumental to patients' recoveries. Several reviewers attribute successful returns home and meaningful mobility gains to these therapists, and specific staff are named multiple times for exceptional work. When the therapy program is engaged, patients and families report a positive, encouraging environment and clear coordination between therapy staff.
However, alongside those positive accounts there are repeated, serious complaints about nursing and medical care. Multiple reviews describe chronic understaffing, forgotten or missed medications, nurses ignoring requests, delayed doctor review, and poor medical communication. Some reports escalate to critical safety incidents: catheter blockages leading to infection, untreated wounds and bedsores, restraints, and claims that neglect contributed to hospitalizations or worse. These incidents are severe red flags and create a pattern of inconsistent clinical oversight. Several reviewers explicitly warn others not to place vulnerable loved ones here because of these risks. Families also report inconsistent responsiveness from nursing supervisors and administration, with some describing unreachable staff, unanswered voicemails, and a lack of follow-up.
Facility upkeep and cleanliness is another bifurcated theme. Many reviewers describe a spotless, well-maintained, renovated building with pleasant common areas and no odor. Conversely, others report significant cleanliness lapses (notably on particular floors such as the 5th), rarely cleaned shared toilets, shower areas left unclean for days, and pest sightings (mice). These conflicting accounts suggest variability by unit or time period — audits or temporary interventions sometimes improve service, implying systemic issues with sustainable housekeeping and infection-control practices. COVID-era sanitation concerns are also mentioned by some families who felt protocols or cleaning standards were insufficient.
Dining and nutrition receive mixed feedback. Several reviews praise meal variety, seasonal menus, and individualized meals prepared by a nutritionist. Yet other reviewers report poor food quality, lack of fresh vegetables and fruit, poorly prepared rice or fish, and meals that did not account for surgical or restrictive diets — in one instance posing a potential health risk. Staffing and kitchen policies also intersect with dignity concerns: some floors lack on-floor refrigeration/microwave options and staff have been unwilling to warm family-brought food for patients, a frequent source of frustration.
Activities and social programming are described variably. Many residents and visitors describe lively activities, music, social dining, religious services, and volunteers, contributing to a cheerful atmosphere. Conversely, some families describe a lack of visible activities, residents left sleeping through afternoons, and insufficient engagement — again pointing to uneven programming or staffing that affects resident quality of life differently across units or shifts.
Management, administration, and communication are recurring problem areas. Numerous reviews call out poor communication about medical events, delayed or mishandled discharges, difficulties obtaining medical records or prescriptions, misplaced clothing after laundry, and billing/transport disputes (including one example of a large unexpected transport fee). Several accounts allege management inaction regarding employee misconduct, theft, or safety concerns; some reviewers attempted to escalate to higher-level or corporate contacts and encountered run-arounds or missing contact information. Positive managerial experiences are reported too — attentive administrators and finance staff are praised — but the balance of complaints about accountability and responsiveness is notable.
There are alarming allegations in a small but serious subset of reviews: claims of abusive behavior masked by friendly demeanor, staff protecting one another, suspicious deaths, and restraint or tying of a resident. While these are not universal, their severity merits attention and follow-up by oversight authorities. Other frequent operational problems include lost personal items, laundry mistakes, delayed housekeeping, maintenance delays (broken toilets, AC, elevator issues), and pest control failures. These operational weaknesses compound care and safety concerns.
In summary, Downtown Brooklyn Nursing and Rehabilitation elicits strongly mixed reviews characterized by standout rehabilitation services and many compassionate, skilled frontline caregivers, yet also by systemic issues in nursing care, staffing, communication, housekeeping, and management accountability. The facility appears capable of delivering excellent care in many cases — particularly in rehabilitation — but experiences vary widely by floor, shift, and staff on duty. For prospective residents and families, the pattern suggests: (1) the rehab program and specific therapists may be a strong asset, (2) insist on clear communication plans and documented medication/therapy schedules, (3) closely monitor wound care, catheter management, and skin integrity, and (4) verify discharge documentation, prescriptions, and retrieval of personal belongings. Given the serious nature of some reports (missed medications, bedsores, restraint, alleged deaths), families should remain vigilant, maintain regular contact, and escalate concerns promptly to facility leadership and external oversight if unresolved.
