Overall sentiment across these reviews is mixed but leans toward an appreciation for the facility’s rehabilitation strengths and certain staff members, balanced against recurring operational and clinical-care concerns. Multiple reviewers praise the therapy program and specific therapists (Amanda and Emily), reporting effective physical therapy and a generally restorative environment. Several comments highlight the facility’s clean, new, and attractive rooms, the ability for residents to bring familiar items (mattresses, lift chairs), and proximity to the hospital as practical advantages for recovery.
Staff behavior and compassion is a prominent positive theme: many reviewers describe employees as kind, hardworking, respectful, compassionate, and professional. Daytime nursing and therapy staff are repeatedly called attentive, and specific staff (including a nutrition specialist named Pat) are noted for going above and beyond to meet individual needs, such as shopping for special dietary requests. Transport staff are also singled out for kindness. The call button responsiveness was cited by some as reliable, and overall many patients were pleased with the short-term rehab experience and happy to be discharged home once recovered.
However, a number of significant concerns were raised about consistency of care and operations. Staffing shortages and resulting wait times are a recurring complaint; multiple reviewers report delayed responses, especially during evenings and weekends. There are frequent reports of medication delays and poor pain management, plus at least one mention of medication mismanagement that raised suspicions about inappropriate practices. Wound care lapses — dressings not being changed for days — and failures to monitor oxygen or meet daily needs were also reported. These kinds of clinical-care gaps are serious and were significant drivers of negative sentiment among reviewers.
Food and housekeeping receive mixed feedback. Some reviewers found the food to be good quality and appreciated consistent fallback options (for example, grilled cheese or hamburgers), while others described the menu as limited, unappealing, or outright terrible, including instances of meal misdelivery. Housekeeping shortfalls were also mentioned, such as sheets not being changed and water mug mix-ups, indicating inconsistencies in basic supportive services. Activity offerings are available (bingo, sing-alongs, storytelling, church services) and appreciated by residents, but some reviewers noted the schedule or engagement dropped off when the activities director was away.
Management, communication, and accountability are additional themes. Several reviewers called for improved communication and a clearer accountability protocol to address care problems. While administration reportedly attempted to resolve concerns in some cases, others felt issues persisted without adequate follow-through. The facility is described as newer and higher cost, with limited space in the long-term wing — factors prospective residents and families may weigh against the positive aspects like therapy quality and environment.
In summary, Stonehenge Of Ogden appears to offer strong rehabilitation services, a supportive daytime staff, modern and comfortable facilities, and some individualized attention (notably from therapy and nutrition staff). At the same time, there are repeated and concerning reports of inconsistent clinical care (medication and wound care delays), variable housekeeping and dining service, and staffing shortfalls that disproportionately affect nights and weekends. Prospective residents and families should consider the facility’s therapy strengths and environment, but also ask targeted questions about staffing levels, after-hours nursing coverage, medication and wound-care protocols, food/menu variety, and administrative accountability before committing. If reliable around-the-clock clinical care and consistent basic services are priorities, those areas warrant verification during tours and conversations with leadership.
