Overall sentiment in the reviews for Haven of St. Elmo is deeply mixed, with strong, recurring praise for caregiving, therapy, and community atmosphere alongside serious and specific allegations of neglect, safety problems, and facility shortcomings. Many reviewers highlight caregiving strengths: CNAs, nurses, and therapy staff receive high marks, with multiple mentions of outstanding CNAs, an "out of this world" nursing aide experience, and an excellent PT/OT department that helped residents recover mobility. Families repeatedly describe a small, homelike, family-oriented culture with long-term staff, strong teamwork, and an administration and leadership team that some find impressive and resident-focused. Concrete institutional positives cited include reliable transportation services, a Secure Memory Care unit, a fenced garden, and a 5-star Medicare rating with a deficiency-free survey — all factors that families noted with appreciation and trust.
Counterbalancing these positives are repeated, serious negative reports that indicate variability in care and potential systemic weaknesses. Several reviews describe abusive staff behavior including yelling and alleged privacy violations. There are multiple, specific complaints around oxygen therapy: denial or neglect of oxygen supply, inability to use oxygen machines due to a lack of distilled water, and even reported theft or loss of oxygen machines and aftercare paperwork. Relatedly, reviewers reported denial of access to residents' personal belongings and medical devices. Mobility and safety concerns appear frequently: residents being left in wheelchairs essentially 24/7, leading to bedsores and physical decline; roommate aggression (one report of being hit with a wheelchair); and at least one account suggesting a preventable fall due to inattentive staff. These incidents raise red flags about day-to-day supervision, clinical follow-through, and respect for resident dignity.
Operational and environmental issues also recur. Multiple reviewers describe the building and fixtures as outdated, bathrooms as "dirty/icky" and in need of repair, limited availability of showers, and cumbersome hand-cranked beds that make care more difficult. Dining is another mixed area: activities are praised and described as wonderful, but food quality is repeatedly characterized as poor, and there are reports of missed breakfasts. Financial or administrative constraints are implicated in at least one report of medication shortages or lack of medicines due to funding. There is also evidence of inconsistent staff performance — while many staff members are praised as compassionate and trustworthy, others are called "inattentive" or "unreputable," and at least one staff member is specifically criticized by name. This inconsistency suggests variability in hiring, supervision, or training across shifts or teams.
Taken together, the reviews paint a picture of a facility with strong clinical rehabilitation capabilities, a committed core of caregiving staff, and some commendable institutional features (memory care security, garden, transportation, high regulatory ratings). However, those strengths coexist with significant, specific concerns about resident safety, equipment management, hygiene, and consistency of care. The contrast between glowing accounts of therapy and CNAs and alarming reports of neglect or abusive behavior suggests the experience can vary widely depending on the staff members and timing involved. Prospective residents and families should weigh the facility's proven therapy and staffing strengths against the documented safety and facility maintenance issues, and consider asking targeted questions and conducting in-person observations about oxygen and medication management, wheelchair and mobility protocols, staff training and supervision, laundry/personal items policies, cleanliness of bathrooms and rooms, and how complaints or incidents are investigated and resolved.
