Overall sentiment across reviews for Rennes Health & Rehab Center - De Pere is highly mixed, with sharply contrasting accounts ranging from “top notch” and “amazing care” to reports of dangerous lapses and poor responsiveness. Multiple reviewers praised the facility’s environment, certain staff members, and therapy services, while an almost equal number described serious quality and safety problems. This pattern suggests inconsistent performance that varies by shift, unit, or individual caregivers rather than uniformly high or low quality throughout the facility.
Care quality and clinical concerns: Reviews repeatedly mention both good and poor clinical care. Several families report excellent nursing and therapy (physical and occupational therapy) with effective follow-through and tangible improvements. Conversely, a substantial number of reviews describe medication errors (wrong meds given, adverse effects such as sickness, dizziness, and falls), inadequate pain control (including one report of 9 hours without pain meds), overmedication concerns, and delayed or absent physician attention during stays. There are also reports of infections (including a C-diff case), wound/safety concerns, and patients whose conditions worsened while in the facility. These specific and serious clinical issues are recurring themes and indicate potential risks in medication administration, monitoring, and clinical oversight.
Staffing, attitudes, and communication: A dominant theme is variability in staff behavior and responsiveness. Positive reviews highlight caring, friendly, efficient, and attentive staff; other reviews describe rude nursing staff, overworked CNAs (particularly at night), staff who ignore call buttons, delayed paramedic response, and social workers who misled families. Multiple reviewers noted poor communication with families and insufficient coordination of therapy plans with family members. Phone lines and internal communication systems were described as unreliable in several accounts. The pattern points to inconsistent staffing levels, training, or management oversight that leads to markedly different experiences depending on the caregiver or shift.
Safety, transfers, and daily living assistance: Safety concerns appear repeatedly: medication mistakes, falls, and transfer difficulties (some residents require multiple staff members for bed or wheelchair transfers). Some reviewers explicitly asked for random medication verification due to fears of errors. There are also complaints of lack of help with packing or discharge logistics, and instances where staff did not assist with preparing residents to leave. These recurring reports raise concerns about protocols for safe transfers, supervision, and discharge handling.
Hygiene, laundry, and facilities: Opinions about the physical plant diverge. Many reviewers found the facility clean, attractive, and with spacious or private rooms; some praised a pleasant environment, holiday celebrations, and convenient laundry pick-up. Others reported hygiene problems such as infrequent showers, persistent odors, bathrooms not properly cleaned, and rusty sinks. There were also reports of missing clothing items. The mixed feedback suggests the facility can provide a clean, comfortable environment but may struggle to maintain consistent housekeeping and personal care standards for all residents.
Dining and activities: Dining impressions range from “enjoys the food” and “homemade meals” to complaints of limited food options. Activities and social programming receive generally positive mentions—social hour and holiday/birthday celebrations were appreciated in multiple reviews—but one reviewer complained about being charged for activities. Overall, activities appear to be an asset, while dining quality is inconsistent across reviewer experiences.
Management and organizational issues: Several reviews call out systemic issues such as short staffing, poor follow-through by certain staff, expensive charges relative to perceived care, and unreliable phones. There are also allegations that the facility can behave in a money-driven manner or lacks adequate care planning and documentation. On the other hand, some reviews emphasize good management practices in positive cases (family-owned/run, special celebrations). The coexistence of praise and criticism implies uneven management execution—strong in some respects or times, weak in others.
Recurring patterns and interpretation: The most frequent and significant themes are inconsistency and variability. Positive experiences emphasize compassionate staff, effective therapy, clean rooms, and enjoyable meals. Negative experiences emphasize medication and safety errors, poor hygiene, ineffective or absent therapy, communication failures, and staffing shortages. Taken together, these patterns suggest that outcomes at Rennes Health & Rehab Center - De Pere may depend heavily on which staff are on duty, specific units, or timing of the resident’s stay. Families considering this facility should be aware of the potential for both high-quality care and serious lapses reported by others.
In sum, reviewers report a facility capable of providing excellent, attentive care and a pleasant environment in many cases, but also a facility with documented risks related to medication administration, infection control, staffing consistency, communication, and hygiene in other cases. The dominant takeaway is that experiences are inconsistent: positive reviews point to clear strengths (therapy, caring staff, activities, and clean facilities at times), while negative reviews raise important safety and management concerns that deserve attention and verification before and during a stay.
