Overall sentiment: The reviews of Carehouse Healthcare Center are highly mixed but skew heavily negative. A substantial portion of reviewers report serious safety and quality-of-care problems, including delayed or missed medical treatments, alleged neglect by CNAs and nurses, and substandard cleanliness. At the same time, several reviews praise individual staff members—particularly some nurses and CNAs—who provided attentive or effective care, and note that activities, outdoor space, and some aspects of dining are acceptable. The dominant themes, however, are failures in basic care, communication, and facility management that in multiple accounts led to emergency room transfers, hospital admissions, and deep family distress.
Care quality and clinical concerns: Multiple reviewers described significant lapses in medical and nursing care. Reports include delayed or missed medications (pain medications delayed up to 12 hours in one report), incorrect medications administered more than once, failure to provide nutritional supplementation (Ensure), rapid weight loss (11 pounds in 8 days cited), worsening or new bedsores, dehydration, high fevers, infections, and suspected sepsis. Several accounts describe poor post-hospital care that necessitated emergency department transfers and ICU stays. These are serious clinical issues that indicate systemic problems with assessment, monitoring, medication administration, wound care, and timely escalation to higher levels of care.
Staff behavior and staffing levels: Reviews depict a wide variation in staff performance. Many reviewers report rude, unprofessional, or neglectful behavior—staff described as lazy, disrespectful, or even talking negatively about residents. Specific examples include residents being left unattended (left in wheelchairs for over an hour), failure to help with toileting, and CNAs allegedly hiding to avoid duties. At the same time, some reviewers single out "stellar" nurses and hardworking CNAs who provided compassionate and competent care. Understaffing and overwhelmed personnel are recurring explanations offered by families for slow responses and lapses in care, which suggests staffing levels and workload are contributing factors.
Safety, infection control, and environment: Multiple reviewers raised safety and infection-control issues. Reports of cross-contamination, filthy conditions, and even sewage backup create concerns about the facility’s cleanliness and suitability for residents with open wounds or recent surgery. Several reviewers explicitly warned that the facility is unsafe for residents with infections or wounds. The interior and resident rooms are frequently described as dated or in need of updating, while outdoor spaces were noted positively. The disparity between a pleasant exterior and an unclean, poorly maintained interior is a recurring comment.
Communication, management, and regulatory concerns: Families report poor communication from the facility—calls left unanswered, long hold times, and in at least one instance no timely notification of a death. Multiple reviewers called out management and upper administration as responsible for mismanagement and lack of integrity. Several reviews urged regulatory investigation or state involvement and used strong language including alleged criminal negligence. These comments suggest deep mistrust between families and leadership and point to potential systemic issues that extend beyond individual staff behavior.
Dining, activities, and resident life: On nonclinical aspects, some positive points appear consistently: the facility offers a daily activities calendar, birthday celebrations, movies, and an activities program that some residents enjoy. There is an option to eat in a dining hall in addition to tray delivery. However, food quality is criticized by other reviewers as "awful," and some residents reportedly refused meals. The presence of activities and occasional compassionate staff are bright spots in an otherwise problematic set of reports.
Patterns and recommendations implied by reviews: The most frequent and serious patterns are delayed medical attention and medication errors, hygiene/cleanliness failures, neglectful or rude staff interactions, and poor communication from administration. The combination of these themes—clinical lapses leading to ER transfers, sanitation problems, and alleged mismanagement—formed the basis for multiple calls for regulatory oversight or investigation. Positive reports emphasize that quality of care seems inconsistent: good care appears linked to specific staff members rather than to systemic facility performance. Families considering this facility should weigh the risk of inconsistent care and documented safety concerns against the reports of compassionate individual staff and available activities. If visiting or placing a loved one, prospective residents and families should ask detailed, specific questions about staffing ratios, infection-control protocols, medication administration processes, wound-care policies, incident reporting, and how the facility communicates with families, and should consider independent inspection or regulatory history before making decisions.
