The reviews for Harrison Pointe Healthcare And Rehabilitation present a mixed and at times sharply divided picture. Multiple reviewers highlight positive aspects: friendly, caring and helpful staff members; a generally clean and well-run facility; and a suite of services that include a good activity program, salon services, physical therapy and an exercise room. Several reviewers noted Medicare coverage and described the facility as having a restful, rest-home atmosphere appropriate for rehabilitation and long-term care. For some families the facility provided “wonderful service” and was described as a better place for their relative, indicating that care quality and outcomes are satisfactory for a number of residents.
At the same time, there are recurring and serious negative themes that cannot be ignored. A common complaint across reviews is long wait times for assistance and an apparent shortage of available staff — reviewers repeatedly said CNAs and nurses were too busy to respond promptly, leaving call lights unanswered. This manifests both as frustration with slow service (e.g., long waits for help) and, in more serious accounts, as neglect (reports of residents left in soiled or wet beds for hours, or left unattended in public areas such as hallways). Several reviews described inattentive or untrained CNAs and nurses; one or more reviewers characterized staff behavior as negligent or even abusive in isolated incidents. There are also allegations of staff dishonesty or cover-ups regarding injuries (bruises), and at least one reviewer mentioned legal action being contemplated.
Dining and activities show mixed feedback. Some reviewers praised the food and the existence of activities, while others specifically called out poor food quality — cold eggs were mentioned as a recurring problem — and said that although activities are offered, certain residents were unable to attend. This suggests variability in how well dining and programming meet individual resident needs, possibly tied to staffing or scheduling constraints.
Facility-level impressions are similarly mixed: the building is described as clean and the operations as well-run by some, yet service delivery and safety appear inconsistent. Several reviewers said staff were “amazing” overall but also recounted at least one problematic CNA incident, underscoring variability in individual caregiver performance. The presence of physical therapy and rehab services is a clear strength for those needing skilled nursing and rehabilitation, but the inconsistent responsiveness of bedside staff undermines confidence for other families.
Taken together, the reviews point to a facility that can deliver strong, compassionate care but appears to struggle with staffing consistency, responsiveness, and quality control in certain shifts or with particular employees. For prospective residents and families, the key considerations would be to: (1) meet with administrators to discuss staffing ratios and response-times; (2) ask about recent incident reports, training programs, and how they handle alleged neglect or bruising; (3) inquire specifically about meal quality and opportunities for participation in activities; and (4) seek references from current or recent families whenever possible. The pattern suggests that experiences can vary widely — some residents receive excellent care and rehabilitation, while others (in a minority of reports) have experienced significant lapses in attention and safety. Prospective families should weigh the positive service offerings and rehabilitation resources against the documented concerns about responsiveness and isolated serious incidents.
