Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans strongly negative, with many reviewers reporting serious and recurring concerns about the quality of medical care, staffing levels, and basic hygiene. Multiple accounts describe neglect that reportedly led to worsened medical conditions (weight loss, ulcers/bedsores, dehydration and malnutrition). While a minority of reviewers praise specific staff members and aspects of the facility, the dominant themes are understaffing, inconsistent care, and management failings.
Care quality is the most frequently criticized area. Reviewers report slow medication delivery, delayed medical attention, inadequate wound care, and poor management of catheters (Foley left in too long). There are repeated mentions of residents being left on toilets for long periods, left soiled or wet, and not turned — all indicators of substandard basic nursing care. Several reports suggest a lack of true medical staff on site (no on-site doctor, limited physician coverage) and reliance on aides rather than licensed nurses, with at least one report that one nurse was responsible for the whole facility. Emergency call-button response times are described as long, and there are examples of discharge processes lacking follow-up appointments or clear medication explanations.
Staffing and management issues are a major pattern. Reviewers note severe understaffing, particularly on weekends when the facility is described as a "ghost town" with as few as one aide for many patients. Staffing policies and culture are criticized: management is described as prejudiced, disrespectful, and unresponsive to both staff and families. Several employees are reportedly forced into inflexible scheduling or required to come in after hospitalization. Nonclinical staff (e.g., housekeepers) are reported to be performing clinical tasks they should not, and there are multiple complaints about unprofessional behavior from staff — gossiping in hallways, texting in patient rooms, and rough handling of residents. These issues combine to create a sense among many reviewers that oversight and clinical leadership are lacking.
Facility condition and cleanliness show mixed reports but numerous concerning details. Some reviewers state the environment was initially clean and well-maintained, and maintenance responsiveness is noted positively in a few cases. However, many other reviews describe poor room cleanliness, bug infestations, lingering foul smells, broken fixtures (scratched walls, broken closet doors), and dark or rundown rooms. Housekeeping and infection-control concerns are serious in several accounts. Food and dining are reported inconsistently: a portion of reviewers say the food is good, while others describe meals as poor, inaccessible, or left to the imagination; meal access and feeding assistance appear to be variable and sometimes inadequate.
Rehabilitation services are the clearest bright spot across the reviews. Physical and occupational therapy teams are frequently described as professional, hardworking, and caring, and therapy is explicitly called a "bright spot" by multiple reviewers. Activities exist (for example, bingo) but some reviewers feel activities staff can be biased or that some residents are sidelined from activities.
A notable pattern is variability: some reviewers report friendly, helpful staff, clean facilities, and satisfaction, while many others report neglect and harm. This suggests inconsistent care quality across shifts, units, or time periods. Given the number and severity of negative accounts — particularly those involving hygiene neglect, wounds, weight loss, medication delays, and poor management response — families and advocates should exercise caution. If considering this facility, it would be prudent to closely monitor clinical care, ask for clear documentation of nursing coverage and medical oversight, confirm weekend access to necessary testing and physician coverage, verify discharge planning and medication reconciliation procedures, and meet the therapy team if rehabilitation is a central need. The most consistent positive takeaway is that rehabilitation staff and a subset of frontline caregivers can provide professional, compassionate care, but these strengths coexist with systemic problems that multiple reviewers say significantly affect resident safety and quality of life.
