Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly mixed but weighted toward significant concerns about basic caregiving, staffing, and management practices. Many reviewers describe serious and recurring problems with personal care (missed or delayed showers, dirty wet briefs), long delays responding to call lights (multiple reports of up to two hours), late or inconsistent medication administration, and poor hygiene/cleanliness in shared bathrooms. These issues point to systemic problems in day-to-day resident care that reviewers link to understaffing and poor scheduling: frequent no-shows, lazy or inattentive staff, and inadequate coverage are repeatedly cited as root causes.
Staffing and staff behavior emerge as one of the clearest divides in the reviews. On the positive side, several reviewers single out CNAs and specific RNs (Eric and Thomas) as exemplary, responsive, informative, and compassionate, and some physical therapists are praised for producing noticeable rehab progress. However, those positive reports sit alongside frequent complaints about inconsistent nurses, rude or indifferent aides, and supervisory incompetence. Multiple reviews accuse staff of dismissiveness, threats, and obstruction when families attempt to advocate for residents. There are also notes of supervisors and leadership being unresponsive or even dishonest; a number of reviewers explicitly urge leadership change.
Management, communication, and administrative conduct are frequent areas of complaint. Reviewers report poor communication about facility status (including unannounced closures to visitors), broken promises related to care or discharge plans, and alleged obstruction or pressure during discharge or relocation processes. A small but serious subset of reviews alleges financial and legal harms—claims of forced asset liquidation, damaged credit history, threats of eviction/discharge, and consideration of legal action. These accounts describe profound negative outcomes for some families and indicate that administrative processes (discharge planning, billing/financial counseling, transfer coordination) have, in some cases, caused severe distress.
Facility and environment feedback is mixed. Several reviewers praise the exterior upkeep, grounds, windows, parking, and some newer, spacious rooms that feel homey. The dining room and kitchen area receive positive mentions from some who enjoy activities like bingo and occasional treats (popcorn, cookies). Conversely, meal service quality is a common complaint: food is described as cold, lacking variety, insufficient in portion size, and sometimes out of stock. Meal timing and service logistics also concern reviewers—late medications coinciding with meal times, slow tray pickup, and overall inconsistent mealtime experience.
Clinical safety issues raised include neglected catheter care, resulting urinary tract infections, dehydration and lack of adequate water, and general neglect noted by hospice staff in at least one review. Those clinical concerns, coupled with delayed or missed medications and slow response to call lights, raise potential safety risks for vulnerable residents. Several reviewers specifically describe feeling that care was so poor that leaving the facility led to family or resident relief.
A clear pattern emerges that experiences vary widely by unit, shift, and individual staff members. Some units or shifts appear to provide clean, attentive, and personalized care with good rehab outcomes and clear communication. Others appear understaffed, poorly supervised, and neglectful, producing severe negative experiences. This variability suggests that root causes may be inconsistent staffing levels, variable management oversight, and uneven staff training or morale.
In summary, while Mt. Ogden Health And Rehabilitation Center receives notable praise in some reviews for individual staff members, therapy results, and parts of the physical environment, there are pervasive and serious complaints about basic care delivery, staffing shortages, food service, infection and hygiene control, management communication, and discharge/administrative practices. The balance of reviews indicates a facility with pockets of good care but systemic operational and leadership issues that have led to harm or distress for multiple residents and families. To address the concerns raised, actions that appear most needed based on these reviews include improved staffing and scheduling, stronger supervisory and leadership accountability, clearer and proactive communication with families, consistent training and monitoring of personal care and medication administration, and immediate attention to dining quality and hygiene standards.
