Overall impression: Reviews for Alaska Gardens Health and Rehabilitation Services are highly mixed and polarized. Many reviewers described excellent, compassionate care from individual staff members and strong rehabilitation outcomes, while a significant portion reported systemic problems including neglect, understaffing, poor communication, and safety incidents. The result is a facility where experiences can range from outstanding therapy and compassionate attention to serious lapses in basic care and safety. Families should be aware of both the positive strengths and the recurring negative patterns when evaluating this facility.
Care quality and staffing: A dominant theme across the reviews is inconsistent care quality driven largely by staffing problems. Multiple reviewers describe CNAs and nurses as overwhelmed or insufficient in number, leading to long waits for assistance, call lights ignored, and routine tasks delayed or skipped. Specific examples include medications given several hours late, Tylenol and other meds not delivered promptly, and alarms/buzzers left unanswered. Several disturbing accounts describe incontinence care failures—residents left in soiled diapers for many hours (one report cites seven hours), patients soaked or left in feces, and poor bathing/hygiene. While many reviewers praised particular nurses and day-shift staff as excellent, night shifts and swing shifts are repeatedly criticized for being disengaged or on their phones rather than responding to patients.
Safety, incidents, and extreme concerns: Some reviews allege serious safety failures, including incidents resulting in hospitalization, pneumonia risk, gangrene, and at least one reviewer linking a death to neglect. There are reports of police involvement and a state investigation in response to care and hygiene complaints. Additional safety-related complaints include poorly maintained rooms (holes in walls, broken in-room phones), inadequate mobility assistance for immobile residents, and rushed or inadequate discharge practices (including last-minute release notices, being discharged home without needed supports, and denial of seeing a primary care physician). These reports raise significant red flags about the facility’s ability to consistently provide safe, reliable skilled nursing care for frail patients.
Facilities, cleanliness, and maintenance: Opinions on cleanliness and upkeep are strongly split. Several reviewers describe the facility as spotlessly clean, with shiny floors, pleasant air quality, and no institutional smell; they noted attractive garden areas and positive resident events like BBQs. Conversely, an equally large set of reviewers report foul odors in hallways (urine smell), garbage in rooms, holes in walls, weed-filled courtyards, and a perception that some spaces have been converted for storage. Handicap parking and outdoor seating for bad weather were noted as limited in some reports. This split suggests variability in maintenance and housekeeping performance over time or between wings/shifts.
Management, communication, and administration: Poor communication between staff and families emerges repeatedly. Families reported not being contacted for days, unanswered calls, broken room phones, and confusion about insurance/coverage. Management behavior is described variably—some reviewers compliment administrative responsiveness (and name several helpful individuals), while others describe a harsh director, rude administrative staff, threats about charging for leaving against medical advice, and perceived financial or dishonest practices. High staff turnover and onboarding challenges were mentioned as underlying contributors to inconsistent care and supervision lapses.
Therapy, activities, and standout staff: Rehabilitation services and activities are among the facility’s strongest aspects according to many reviewers. Multiple accounts praise physical and occupational therapists, noting successful outcomes such as patients regaining the ability to walk after ICU stays. The activities department and several named employees (Crystal, Adriana for transportation, Emma in social services, Jose, Carlton, Mercy) received repeated personal commendations for being helpful, compassionate, and going above and beyond. These positive reports indicate that when therapy and engagement resources are available and staffed, they perform well and make a meaningful difference for residents.
Dining and amenities: Dining receives mixed feedback. Several reviewers disliked the food—describing it as poor or small portions—and others reported service issues (missed meals, food floating in water on trays). Vending machine offerings and labeling accuracy (e.g., sugar-free items) were questioned. At the same time, some reviewers appreciated community amenities such as gardens and resident activities.
Patterns and practical takeaways: The most consistent pattern is high variability—some residents and families experienced excellent care, cleanliness, and effective therapy, while others experienced neglect, hygiene failures, medication errors, and severe safety lapses. Named staff and departments (therapy, activities, transportation, social work) are often singled out for praise, indicating pockets of strong performance within the facility. Conversely, systemic issues (staffing levels, night shift responsiveness, management communication, and maintenance) recur in multiple negative accounts.
Conclusion and considerations for families: Alaska Gardens shows both meaningful strengths and serious risks. Strengths include strong rehabilitation services, an engaged activities program, and multiple individual staff members who earn high praise. However, recurrent reports of understaffing, unattended call lights, delayed or missed medications, incontinence and hygiene neglect, maintenance problems, and allegations of serious safety incidents cannot be ignored. Prospective residents and families should seek up-to-date information about staffing levels, supervisory oversight, incident investigations, and recent state survey findings; meet with therapy, nursing, and social work teams; verify discharge and emergency procedures; and, if possible, observe multiple shifts (including evenings/nights) before deciding. If choosing the facility, closely monitor care, maintain active communication with social services (several reviewers found Emma helpful), and document any concerns promptly so they can be escalated to management and regulatory authorities as needed.
