Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly mixed but weighted toward serious concerns. Many reviewers describe compassionate, attentive care from particular staff members and positive experiences — often noting a clean, home-like atmosphere, strong bedside manner, helpful admissions processes, engaging activities, and staff who "go the extra mile." However, an equal or larger set of reviews describe patterns of neglect, poor staffing, and facility maintenance issues that raise safety and quality-of-care concerns.
Care quality and clinical concerns are central themes. Multiple reports describe delayed or missed wound and ostomy care (dressings not changed for days), late Foley catheter changes, medication errors or missing medications, ignored reminders for medical devices (e.g., BiPAP), and therapy that was requested but never delivered. These are not isolated gripes about comfort — reviewers link them to tangible harm, including hospitalizations and a decline in residents' health. Several families explicitly said therapy was limited, ineffective, or billed as an extra charge, and that medical appointments were missed or poorly coordinated between the facility and outside providers.
Staffing and staff behavior are another major pattern. Numerous accounts describe understaffing, long call-light response times (hours in some reports), and CNAs or nurses who were rude, dismissive, or aggressive. Several reviews describe basic caregiving omissions: no bed baths, wet underwear left for extended periods, use of bedpans instead of assisted toileting, and inattention at nurse stations. In contrast, some reviews name specific staff (e.g., "Jessica L") and managers who provided excellent, compassionate care and who corrected mistakes when notified. This bifurcation suggests inconsistent staffing performance and possibly variable shift-level or unit-level culture.
Facility environment and maintenance issues recur. The building is frequently described as old or "ancient," with plumbing problems, leaky toilets, and at least one report of non-working air conditioning creating very hot conditions requiring families to bring fans. Strong urine or other odors are mentioned repeatedly, contrasted by other reviews that describe the facility as spotless and smelling good on certain visits. Noise in hallways at night and small room sizes (beds pushed against walls) contribute to a sense of discomfort for some residents. These mixed reports again point to significant variability in upkeep and cleanliness across time or different parts of the building.
Dining and activities receive mixed feedback. Many reviewers praise engaging activities and planned events, and some praise the food or specific meals. Conversely, several reviews call out inconsistent meal quality, cold food, limited beverage availability, and dietary errors (for example, a low-sodium diet supposedly served as hot dogs and chips). Such inconsistencies can be particularly concerning for residents with strict dietary needs.
Management, communication, and trust issues appear frequently. Multiple reviewers note a decline in quality after an administrative change, and others report poor communication with social work or medical staff, blaming of transportation services for missed appointments, and hostility from staff toward families. Some families reported management apologized but offered explanations rather than immediate remediation. At least one reviewer stated an intention to report the facility to the health department, indicating a high level of dissatisfaction and perceived risk.
Safety and dignity concerns are present in several reviews and should not be overlooked. Allegations include inappropriate or sexual behavior by staff, feelings of being "like jail," and neglected grooming and personal hygiene. These accounts, coupled with reports of medical neglect and missed medications, point to systemic problems for certain residents or shifts.
In summary, Camelback Post Acute Care And Rehabilitation elicits polarized experiences: some families and residents report excellent, compassionate care, clean and home-like surroundings, proactive staff, and good coordination for long-term placements; others report serious lapses in basic nursing care, medication and wound-management errors, understaffing, poor facility maintenance, and troubling safety and dignity issues. The variability suggests inconsistent staffing, shift-to-shift performance differences, and possible declines following administrative changes. Prospective residents and families should be aware of both the positive testimonials and the serious negative reports. If considering this facility, ask specific, recent questions about staffing ratios, wound-care and ostomy coverage, therapy availability and billing, recent inspection or deficiency reports, air conditioning and maintenance issues, dietary accommodations, and how complaints are handled and documented. Additionally, request references from current families, tour multiple units at different times of day, and verify whether the facility has taken documented corrective actions for the problems noted in complaints.
