The reviews for Paramount Convalescent Hospital are highly polarized but trend toward growing concern. Multiple reviewers describe genuinely positive experiences — attentive staff, thorough care coordination, clear communication with families, effective discharge planning, and helpful insurance guidance. Several accounts praise cleanliness, a friendly environment, and specific staff who provided compassionate care. These positive reviews indicate the facility has the capacity to provide very good post-acute care under certain conditions.
However, a substantial body of reviews reports a marked decline in quality, often tied to changes in management and administrative turnover. Several reviewers explicitly say the facility was "previously great" but has "gone downhill" since a new director or administration arrived. These negative accounts describe broad operational problems: poor follow-through on care plans, frequent staff shortages, sitters or aides not showing up, and some residents being left unfed. There are multiple reports of delayed responses to basic care needs, and at least a few serious clinical concerns such as bedsores and an eye infection attributed to inadequate nursing attention.
Dining and programs are recurring flashpoints. Korean-language reviewers emphasize that culturally appropriate Korean meals and programs were once available and acceptable but have become "sub-par" or "not edible" after recent changes; one reviewer explicitly calls the Korean meals "unacceptable." Meal service problems also include rushed meals and force-feeding incidents described by witnesses. Removal of worship services and program reductions were also mentioned, which contributes to perceptions of declining resident quality of life.
Staff behavior and safety concerns appear repeatedly. While some staff are described as kind and responsive, other reviews allege unprofessional conduct: rudeness, eye-rolling, fake smiles, and even physical mistreatment (a nurse pushing a patient, forced feeding). There are also accusations that leadership has covered up incidents or deflected accountability, with supervisors described as dismissive or claiming "misunderstandings" rather than taking corrective action. These reports raise consistent concerns about staff training, supervision, and a culture of accountability.
Facility cleanliness and environment receive mixed comments. Some reviewers call the facility "super clean" and well-kept, but others report persistent urine odors, messy rooms, and inadequate housekeeping. Room sharing and crowding are also noted as issues for some families, reducing privacy and comfort. Belongings reportedly lost or not returned and stretched resources for laundry/clothing are additional practical complaints that have affected families.
Administrative, financial, and regulatory problems are prominent in several reviews. Reported issues include Medicare deficiencies cited by reviewers, unpaid vendor invoices for months, payroll problems for staff (including unpaid orientation), and an administrator who is reportedly difficult to reach. These financial and management problems compound clinical and care concerns and suggest systemic operational weaknesses. There are also accusations that the facility may be attempting to push out Korean-speaking residents, which combined with marketing inaccuracies and policy changes has led some families to consider filing complaints with health authorities.
Overall, the pattern across reviews is one of inconsistency: strong, positive experiences coexisting with troubling negative reports. The most commonly repeated themes are a decline in quality after management changes, unreliable staffing and attendant neglect risks, unacceptable meal quality for certain cultural groups, lapses in cleanliness, unprofessional staff interactions, and administrative instability including payment and regulatory concerns. Prospective residents and families should weigh both sides: there are clear examples of excellent care and coordination, but there are enough serious and recurring complaints that careful vetting, asking about current management, staffing ratios, food services (especially for culturally specific diets), regulatory reports, and recent deficiency corrections is advisable before choosing this facility.
