Overall sentiment across the submitted reviews is sharply mixed, with a clear pattern: the facility's rehabilitation/therapy services receive consistently strong praise, while long-term nursing care, communication, and some safety/cleanliness aspects draw repeated criticism. Many reviewers describe Charlotte Health & Rehabilitation Center as an excellent place for short-term rehab — citing a large, well-equipped therapy gym, innovative aquatic therapy (including an underwater treadmill), professional and knowledgeable therapists, and positive functional outcomes. Multiple families and patients explicitly said they would return for therapy, highlighting prompt, effective rehabilitation and staff who make sessions productive and supportive.
By contrast, numerous reviews raise serious concerns about nursing care quality and supervision, especially for long-term residents. Reported problems include medication administration without checking vital signs (for example, giving medications without checking blood pressure), delays or failure to respond to call bells and bathroom requests, poor or inconsistent hygiene (residents not bathed or changed, linens not changed often), and reports of urine on floors. Some reviews describe extreme adverse outcomes allegedly linked to care lapses — delayed wound care that reportedly led to gangrene and amputation, dehydration and kidney failure, and cases where residents were transferred to the hospital with serious complications. There are also multiple reports of falls and delayed responses after a fall; one review cites a fall with head injury and severe consequences. These accounts portray a pattern of uneven nursing attention and potential safety risk for frail, long-stay residents.
Facility conditions are described inconsistently across reviews. Several visitors and families reported a clean, odor-free, and well-maintained environment with pleasant common areas, an engaging dining room, outdoor space, and rooms that appear updated. Conversely, other reviewers described old or dingy areas, broken furniture or TVs, delayed maintenance (e.g., repairs postponed until Monday), and in isolated but serious instances, pest sightings (bed bugs and roaches). There are also reports of missing personal items and privacy violations (including unauthorized photos), which raise additional concerns about resident dignity and security.
Dining and activities are another area of mixed feedback. Many reviewers praised the meals — noting restaurant-style service, tasty warm food, dietary accommodations (such as low-sodium options), and a social dining environment with games and bingo. Yet others strongly disliked the food, describing it as cold, soft, or ‘‘horrible,’’ with families bringing outside food in response. Activities, social dining, and outdoor space were highlighted positively in multiple reviews, contributing to better daily life for some residents.
Management, communication, and responsiveness vary across accounts. Several reviews praised the management team and Director of Nursing for being immediately helpful, hands-on during transitions, and communicative (weekly check-ins were mentioned). However, a substantial number of reviews describe poor communication, unresolved complaints after meetings with leadership, billing and self-pay complications, and failure to inform families about clinical issues (for example, catheter problems or changes in condition). These mixed reports suggest variability in administrative follow-through and family engagement depending on the unit or staff on duty.
Safety and care-process concerns recur: call bell delays, insufficient overnight staffing or supervision, malfunctioning door-alarm systems, and inconsistent monitoring are repeatedly cited. Clinical issues such as catheter mishandling, inadequate trach or wound care for some residents, and delays in assessments are also described. These problems, combined with reports of missed or inconsistent medication checks and lack of timely response to clinical deterioration, elevate the level of concern for residents with high medical needs.
In summary, the reviews paint a complex picture. Charlotte Health & Rehabilitation Center appears to offer strong, even outstanding, rehabilitative services with caring and skilled therapy staff, good dining and social opportunities for many patients, and a clean, pleasant environment in several units. At the same time, there are serious and recurrent complaints about nursing care quality, safety and supervision, hygiene for long-stay residents, inconsistent management response, and scattered but severe adverse events reported by families. The overall pattern suggests the facility may perform much better for short-term, therapy-focused stays than for long-term nursing care for medically fragile residents. Prospective residents and families should weigh the consistently positive rehab reports against the recurring safety and nursing concerns, and consider asking direct, specific questions about nursing staffing levels, wound and catheter care protocols, call-bell response times, infection control, pest management, and how the facility addresses and documents complaints before committing to long-term placement.
