Overall sentiment across these reviews is sharply mixed, with a substantial split between families and residents who report high-quality, compassionate care and those who allege serious neglect and safety concerns. Multiple reviews praise the staff as caring, professional, communicative, and attentive, and note clean, organized common areas, spacious rooms, appealing food, and successful programming such as a COVID-19 vaccination clinic. Conversely, a significant subset of reviews describe disturbing lapses in basic care, hygiene, and safety, with several accounts claiming dehydration, missed hygiene/diaper changes, falls, missing personal items, and in extreme cases death linked to neglect.
Care quality: The most frequent theme is inconsistency. Many reviewers describe the facility as providing skilled, effective care that improves residents' quality of life; these reviewers highlight attentive nurses, timely alerts when conditions change, and families who feel informed and confident. At the same time, other reviewers recount severe problems: delayed or absent care (long waits for nursing attention), inadequate assistance with toileting and feeding, dehydration and malnutrition concerns, and incidents where residents were unattended, not secured in wheelchairs, or fell. Several families report having to personally intervene—changing a patient’s clothes or providing basic care—because staff did not respond. Notably, multiple reviews describe situations that rise to the level of alleged neglect resulting in hospitalization or death, which are among the most serious concerns raised.
Staff behavior and communication: Reviews reflect polarized experiences with staff. Many comments single out staff members (and one named employee) for praise, noting empathy, good communication, and friendly professional conduct. Positive reports include families being kept informed, nurses checking on patients, and staff who contribute to a home-like environment. In contrast, other reviews describe rude, disrespectful, or unconcerned staff who snap at residents, gossip, appear sad or unmotivated, or even smell of alcohol. Communication is likewise inconsistent: some families praise clear, timely updates while others report no notification when a resident was hospitalized or sent to the ICU. This variability suggests staffing or management issues that create pronounced differences by shift or unit.
Facilities and cleanliness: Observations of the physical environment are mixed. Several reviews note a clean, organized facility with fresh paint and renovations underway, while other reviewers report an old building with awful odors (strong urine smell), general cleanliness problems, and even mold found in a bedside cup. These contradictions suggest that cleanliness and maintenance may be unevenly applied across areas or over time. Renovation activity and improvements are mentioned, indicating management attention to the environment, but persistent odor and hygiene complaints remain a recurring negative theme.
Activities, dining, and quality of life: Comments about programming are split. Some residents and families praise activities, social programming, and appealing food, reporting that residents are engaged, happy, and well cared for. Other reviewers say activities are minimal or nonexistent, with residents left sitting in wheelchairs all day and lacking a relaxing chair in their room. This again points to inconsistent resident engagement — some units or times may offer robust programming while others do not.
Safety, incidents, and management concerns: Several reviews call for stronger oversight, training, and possibly state inspection; criticisms include the need for staff people-skills training, better nighttime/evening staffing, and an overall facility overhaul. Safety issues such as falls, unsecured residents, missed diaper changes, dehydration, and missing clothing are recurrent and severe enough in some reports to warrant escalation. There are also allegations of staff alcohol odor and mold/poor hygiene that raise regulatory and infection-control questions. These are not isolated minor complaints but reflect a pattern for a number of families.
Patterns and takeaways: The dominant pattern is high variability. Positive reviews consistently highlight caring staff, good communication, and improved resident well-being, while negative reviews focus on neglect, safety lapses, hygiene problems, and unprofessional behavior. The variability appears to align with shifts or specific staff members—many positives reference daytime professionalism and particular employees, while many negatives reference poor evening/overnight care or specific incidents of neglect. For a prospective resident or family, these reviews suggest the facility can provide strong, compassionate care but also carries a nontrivial risk of serious lapses. Practical steps for decision-making would include an in-person visit during multiple shifts, asking about staff-to-resident ratios and training, reviewing recent inspection reports, and verifying how the facility communicates and documents incidents and hospitalizations.
In summary, Roberta Health and Rehab elicits polarized impressions: it has demonstrable strengths in staff compassion, communication, and resident programming in many cases, yet also significant and repeating complaints about neglect, hygiene, safety, and inconsistent staffing that have led to serious adverse outcomes according to reviewers. The balance of these factors will be highly dependent on unit, shift, and management responsiveness; the reviews collectively indicate a need for continued oversight, targeted staff training, and operational improvements to address the most severe and recurring concerns.
