Overall sentiment across reviews for Phoenix Assisted Care LLC is mixed, with a substantial number of first-hand accounts praising the staff, cleanliness, affordability, and activity programming, while a notable subset of reviews describe serious problems with communication, inconsistent care, safety, and management. Many families report positive, hands-on caregivers who are compassionate, professional, and available around the clock. Multiple reviewers highlight a clean facility, reasonably balanced meals, inclusion of medication administration and laundry services, hospice acceptance, an all-inclusive pricing model with no hidden fees, and ongoing facility improvements such as shower room and flooring renovations. The memory-care unit and activity programming earn repeated praise in many accounts, and several reviewers specifically commend the manager Donna for responsiveness and thorough communication. Location in Cary, acceptance of motorized wheelchairs, and affordability are additional strengths cited by those who recommend Phoenix.
However, a distinct and troubling pattern appears in a number of detailed negative reviews. These accounts describe serious lapses in care including hospitalizations, infections, reports of neglect, inadequate Alzheimer's/dementia care, and at least one resident death that reviewers tied to alleged facility failings. Safety concerns are prominent in these narratives: falls, biting incidents, wandering, and abrupt removals of residents without sufficient notification are specifically reported. Several families mention poor hygiene and sanitation in certain situations, including urine/feces odors and residents found in soiled clothing, as well as allegations of privacy invasion and inappropriate staff conduct such as unauthorized photos. Some reviewers also note that state agencies (DHHS) were involved or that complaints were filed, indicating the severity of certain incidents.
Staffing and management are central to the disparity in experiences. While many reviews praise individual caregivers as compassionate and knowledgeable, other reviews point to high staff turnover, a lack of continuity, and inconsistent staffing quality—especially at night—where staff are characterized as uncaring or lazy. Communication with administration is described as inconsistent: some families report prompt, helpful responses from managers (again, Donna is named positively), whereas others recount difficulty reaching administrative staff, unanswered calls (Erika cited), and dismissive replies when raising concerns. These mixed reports suggest variable leadership experiences depending on time, staff on duty, or particular managers.
Food, activities, and amenities also show divergent feedback. Several reviewers report nutritious, well-balanced meals with good portions and a variety of activities (bingo, community walks, devotional services), while others describe cold or undercooked meals, fried-heavy menus, poor food quality (crumbled chips, burned food), and even insufficient drinking water. Activity offerings are praised by many—especially in memory care—but some reviews explicitly state there were no activities or limited engagement, again pointing to inconsistency across shifts or time. Facility characteristics are consistently described as older and no-frills: most reviewers note the place is clean and well-maintained but not fancy, with smaller, sometimes dark rooms and lacking luxury amenities like a pool or movie theater. Ongoing renovations are a plus, but a few people commented on an industrial or hospital-like feel rather than a home-like atmosphere.
Operational details that families found beneficial include included medication administration, laundry, hospice access, and an all-inclusive rate. Negative operational concerns include a lack of basic TV/local channels without an extra cable subscription, occasional shortages of supplies (pull-ups, wipes), and problems with phone communication. Several reviews explicitly advise prospective families to be proactive and closely involved in oversight of their loved ones, reflecting a common recommendation to monitor care quality given the variability reported.
In summary, Phoenix Assisted Care LLC receives many positive endorsements for caring direct-care staff, cleanliness, affordability, and activity engagement; however, there are repeated, serious negative reports that raise concerns about safety, consistency of care, management communication, and certain hygiene/neglect issues. The overall picture is one of a facility capable of providing very good, compassionate care under many circumstances but with uneven performance and some severe lapses that prospective residents and families should investigate further. Families considering this facility should weigh the documented strengths (cost, hands-on staff, included services, positive memory-care engagement) against the documented risks (staff turnover, reported neglect, communication failures, and safety incidents), perform in-person visits at different times of day, ask specific questions about staffing continuity and incident history, and remain actively involved after move-in to help ensure consistent quality of care.
