Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed but leans heavily toward concern. While a minority of reviewers describe positive experiences — citing professional, compassionate staff, competent clinical capabilities, good dining, and an attractive facility appearance — a large number of reviews report serious, recurring problems. The most frequent themes are neglect, poor responsiveness to call bells, and inconsistent or inadequate staffing, particularly on nights and weekends. Many families reported that residents were left in bed for long periods, were not turned, had infrequent bathing, and suffered declines in mobility and muscle tone. These clinical neglect reports are some of the most serious and commonly repeated issues across the summaries.
Staff behavior and communication is another major theme. Multiple reviewers described staff as rude, disrespectful, or unresponsive. Call buttons and buzzers were repeatedly reported as unmanned for hours, with some accounts stating that staff were unavailable or on break during emergencies. There are also numerous reports of delayed clinical actions — delayed lab results, late notification of hospital transfers, and delayed or absent physical therapy — which families linked to worse outcomes such as readmissions, falls, and prolonged recovery. At the administrative level, reviewers described unhelpful social workers or supervisors, unresolved complaints, and billing disputes including move fees and perceived overcharges.
Hygiene and cleanliness concerns appear repeatedly and range from infrequent laundry and rooms that reek of urine to reports of bugs, maggots, and flies associated with wounds. Several accounts describe trash not being disposed of properly, soiled diapers left in rooms, clogged bathrooms left unrepaired, and general poor housekeeping practices. These environmental issues frequently compound the clinical and staffing problems, contributing to an overall impression by many reviewers that basic care needs are not consistently met.
Safety and equipment problems were also raised: improperly sized wheelchairs, too-small or poorly placed TVs, dark rooms, and locked courtyards with no accessible outdoor area. Families expressed concern about fall risk management, delayed emergency response, and inadequate supervision of residents with sundowning or cognitive issues that left them confined to rooms. There are also isolated but severe allegations of wound neglect and lost personal items (including dentures), which heighten safety and dignity concerns for some residents.
The reviews show a pronounced variability in experience: some reviewers praise staff and care enough to recommend the facility, while many others report severe neglect and unprofessional behavior. A few reviewers specifically noted that conditions were acceptable or better before the COVID-19 period, implying that staffing and care consistency may have worsened since then. This pattern suggests uneven quality that may depend on shift, unit, or specific caregivers.
In summary, potential residents and families should be aware of a split picture: the facility can present well and has reported strengths in clinical capability and certain staff members’ performance, but there are widespread and recurring complaints about neglect, hygiene, responsiveness, and administration. These issues—particularly around timely assistance, personal hygiene, wound and medication management, and staffing levels at nights/weekends—are substantial and were cited repeatedly. Anyone considering this facility should seek up-to-date, specific information about current staffing levels, wound-care protocols, response times to call bells, laundry and housekeeping procedures, and how complaints and billing disputes are handled. It would also be prudent to ask for recent inspection reports and to visit different shifts to assess consistency of care firsthand.
