Overall sentiment across the supplied reviews is negative with several consistent and serious concerns about basic cleanliness, personal property management, and staff responsiveness, tempered by a few specific operational strengths. Multiple reviewers report strong, unpleasant urine and feces odors in resident rooms and common areas, and describe rooms and bathrooms as dirty. These cleanliness and sanitation issues appear to be recurring and are highlighted as immediate, tangible problems that affect quality of life and first impressions. In at least one admission-related account, a room was not cleaned before a new resident arrived, indicating lapses in turnover procedures.
Facility- and environment-related feedback is mixed. On the positive side, reviewers note that rooms are generally large enough for residents and that the facility's location is convenient. There is also specific mention of an on-site critical wound nurse, which indicates availability of specialized clinical expertise for complex wound care cases. Staffing levels are described positively in terms of ratios, with at least one reviewer stating the staff-to-patient ratio is good. However, these operational strengths are undermined by reports of inadequate equipment for larger residents, suggesting some gaps in the physical resources or supply of appropriate assistive devices.
Care quality and staff behavior are a major theme. Several reviewers characterize staff as neglectful or inattentive, reporting that residents are ignored and requests are not handled promptly. An example of slow response is the delayed replacement of an identification bracelet, which suggests weaknesses in routine care processes and responsiveness. The juxtaposition of a favorable staff-to-patient ratio with descriptions of neglect implies that staffing numbers alone are not translating into reliable, attentive care in practice.
Management of personal property and laundry emerges as a consistent and troubling pattern. Reviews report lost clothes and shoes, residents being dressed in items from the lost-and-found, and other residents' belongings left in drawers. These issues point to systemic problems in clothing inventory, labeling, or laundry handling procedures, and they contribute to residents feeling disrespected and to family distrust. The presence of other residents' personal items (toothbrush, comb) left in bathrooms further reinforces concerns about both housekeeping thoroughness and respect for personal space.
The overall tone conveyed is that the facility can feel impersonal and institutional; several reviewers explicitly describe a 'hospital-like' environment and explicitly state they would not recommend the facility. While some technical strengths exist (wound care nurse, adequate room size, and a reportedly good staff-to-patient ratio), these do not outweigh the practical and recurring deficiencies in cleanliness, personal-item management, and everyday responsiveness described by reviewers.
Notably absent from the reviews are specific comments about dining quality, recreational activities, therapy programs, or family communication practices. Because those domains are not mentioned in the provided summaries, no informed conclusions can be drawn about them. In summary, the reviews suggest that Woodland Terrace Care And Rehab has some clinical and structural positives but faces significant operational and housekeeping problems that materially affect resident comfort, dignity, and perceived quality of care.
