Overall sentiment across the reviews for Meridian Care of Monte Vista is mixed and polarized. Multiple reviewers praise certain concrete strengths — engaging activities under a new activity director (including a popular lottery), daily housekeeping and clean rooms, meals that guests enjoy with customization options, and evidence that ownership is investing in building improvements. Several reviewers explicitly describe the staff and nurses as friendly, caring, and helpful, and some call out excellent food and a pleasant nearby neighborhood with a bakery/restaurant. A few reviewers describe the facility as beautiful or note visible improvements that suggest management has begun investing in upgrades.
At the same time, a number of serious and recurring concerns emerge. Staffing and care quality are the most frequently flagged problems: reviewers report short-handed shifts, only two nurses on a floor at times, high staff turnover, and staff who appear overworked or unhappy. Several reviewers specifically mention long call-button response times and difficulty obtaining accurate information from staff or administration. These operational shortfalls are linked by some families to a recent deterioration in care compared with earlier experiences. The result is described as inconsistent care quality — some shifts and individual caregivers receive high praise, while others prompt complaints and worry.
Facility upkeep and odor issues are another recurring theme. While ownership investment and renovations are noted, multiple reviewers report poor upkeep in areas of the building and describe a motel-like, older facility that needs maintenance. Unpleasant urine odors and other smells are mentioned by several reviewers, undermining the perception of cleanliness despite reports that rooms are cleaned daily. This contrast suggests that while housekeeping for resident rooms may be consistent, broader environmental maintenance and odor-control remain problems.
Most concerning are the serious safety and transparency allegations raised by some reviewers: unexplained bruises, fractures, and urinary tract infections (UTIs) are reported, and at least one account alleges lying and cover-up by administration and staff. These are strong red flags for patient safety and organizational transparency and were cited by reviewers who ultimately would not recommend the facility. At the same time, other reviewers explicitly say they have experienced excellent or very caring staff, which points to significant variability in resident outcomes and experiences.
Management and communication receive mixed marks. A few reviewers say administration is fine and identify particularly helpful nurses who provide good information. Conversely, others describe difficulty obtaining accurate information and accuse staff and leadership of dishonesty or of covering up incidents. Ownership investment in improvements is a positive signal, but it appears not yet to have resolved operational and staffing issues according to several accounts.
In summary, the reviews depict a facility with notable strengths — engaging activities, pleasant meals with options, daily room housekeeping, and some genuinely caring staff and nurses. However, those positives are offset by persistent and serious concerns about staffing levels, long response times, poor general upkeep and odor, inconsistent care quality, and troubling allegations regarding unexplained injuries and lack of transparency. Prospective families should weigh these mixed signals carefully: visit multiple times, speak with current families and staff, observe different shifts, ask for specifics about staffing ratios, response times, incident reporting and follow-up, and verify what improvements ownership has enacted and how staffing and safety issues are being addressed before making a placement decision.
