Overall sentiment across the reviews is predominantly negative, with multiple recurring and serious concerns about care quality, cleanliness, staffing, maintenance, and management responsiveness. A consistent pattern emerges where isolated pockets of good care (notably among some CNAs, certain nurses, the physical therapy team, activities and laundry staff) exist within a facility that many reviewers describe as run-down and poorly run. Several reviewers explicitly urge against placing loved ones at the facility, and numerous accounts describe neglectful incidents that raise patient safety and dignity concerns.
Care quality and responsiveness: The most frequently reported care issues are missed care tasks, delayed responses to call lights, and inadequate toileting and bathing. Specific allegations include residents receiving few showers, cries for help being ignored, extremely long waits for diaper changes (reports of six-plus hours), and staff ignoring a resident in distress. There are multiple reports of medication administration problems and instances of belongings being dumped or damaged during moves or by staff. While some CNAs and nurses are praised for compassionate care, these positive reports are outnumbered by accounts of understaffing, high turnover, and reliance on agency and traveling nurses. Several reviewers stated that traveling/agency staff sometimes hold supervisory authority over in-house staff, contributing to confusion and inconsistent care.
Staffing, training, and professionalism: Chronic understaffing and high turnover are central themes. Reviewers describe heavy use of agency staff, insufficient time for care tasks, and pervasive lack of training or behavior management skills. Professionalism is repeatedly called into question: staff are frequently observed using personal phones during shifts, displaying rude or disrespectful bedside manner, or being unresponsive to residents' needs. There are reports that senior nursing leadership sometimes behaves inappropriately (an allegation that the Director of Nursing threatened residents), and several reviewers complain that management is unhelpful, dismissive, or fails to resolve complaints. A few reviews counterbalance this by saying management is attempting improvements and that a turnaround may be underway, but those positive notes are in the minority.
Facility condition and maintenance: Many reviewers report significant facility maintenance issues: mold throughout the building, stained carpets, peeling paint, cracked ceilings, overpainted surfaces, and rotted outdoor features such as a gazebo. Grounds and exterior maintenance are described as neglected, with gaps in doors at the rehab wing allowing dirt, leaves, and even rodents to enter. Housekeeping complaints include urine odors, inadequately cleaned rooms, dirty wheelchairs, and generally poor cleanliness. One reviewer noted cleanliness was adequate in a specific case, but that appears to be an exception. False advertising of room photos was also mentioned, suggesting a discrepancy between marketing and reality.
Safety, healthcare processes, and communication: Several reviewers raised safety concerns that they say were not addressed by staff or management, along with reports that complaints are ignored or unresolved. There is at least one mention that no state inspection was posted, which reviewers interpreted as a lack of transparency. Communication issues extend to family members being frustrated by poor feedback, denial of nurse access, and policies or behaviors described as creating a 'jail-like' atmosphere for visitors. These communication breakdowns exacerbate family distress and erode trust in the facility's ability or willingness to improve.
Dining, activities, and specific service areas: Reports about dining are mixed: some reviewers said food 'looks good' but others complained that food was cold. Activities staff receive positive comments for engagement and programming. Physical therapy and rehab were praised in multiple summaries as 'fabulous' when it was available, but there are also allegations of rehab neglect and difficulties associated with room moves that affect therapy and care continuity. Laundry staff are consistently praised, which stands out as one functional department amid otherwise widespread operational concerns.
Notable patterns and contradictions: The reviews present a split narrative: pockets of competent, compassionate staff (CNAs, some nurses, PT, activities, laundry) versus systemic operational failures (maintenance, housekeeping, staffing, management responsiveness). This split suggests that while individual employees may try to provide good care, systemic issues—leadership, staffing models, training, maintenance, and accountability—are undermining the overall quality and safety of the facility. A few reviews indicate management claims of a new direction and improvements underway; however, the volume and severity of negative reports indicate that any improvements are either recent, insufficient, or not yet perceptible to many residents and families.
Conclusion and implications: The weight of the reviews indicates significant and recurring problems with hygiene, safety, staffing, and facility upkeep that warrant urgent attention. While there are commendable staff members and some departments performing well, the persistent themes—mold, odors, missed care, ignored call lights, understaffing, agency dominance, unresolved complaints, and alleged poor leadership—point to systemic failures that impact resident dignity and safety. Families considering this facility should weigh the reported positives (strong therapy, activities, and some compassionate caregivers) against the frequent and specific allegations of neglect, poor maintenance, and inadequate management response. If decision-makers or regulators are reviewing these reports, the issues described would justify a targeted inspection, verification of state posting and compliance records, and a review of staffing models, maintenance plans, and complaint resolution processes to ensure resident safety and quality of care.
