Casa Socorro Residential Care Home

Pros

• The staff were very helpful to her grandfather.
• The service was great, even though the facility's interior wasn't impressive.
• Daisy and Ruby provided excellent service.
• She received decent care, and the nurses and staff were very helpful.
• The social worker was kind.

Cons

• A reviewer warned others not to send loved ones to Windsor Care, claiming the staff don't care and hire thieves who take advantage of the elderly.
• The staff were described as overwhelmed and lacking basic human decency.
• A staff member allegedly became physically abrasive with a patient, causing her to cry.
• On release day, the patient was dropped on the floor.
• The facility was alleged to tolerate widespread abuse, neglect, and disparity.
• A horrific odor was reported inside the facility.
• A nurse allegedly tried to hit and threatened a family member.
• Nurses and caregivers were accused of laziness for not helping residents to the bathroom, leaving them in wet or soiled conditions.
• The director was not upfront with the police and avoided them.
• The reviewer claimed racism and biased treatment by a nurse toward a family member.

Review

Windsor Care Facility is the setting for a chorus of troubling experiences reported by multiple residents, families, and observers. Across several accounts, the common thread is a sense of vulnerability for elderly residents who are supposed to be in a controlled, supportive environment, yet are described as being left unprotected, inadequately supervised, and sometimes neglected or mistreated. The narratives come from different angles - one family's acute personal trauma, others' broader observations - yet they echo a shared concern: that safety, dignity, and accountability are inconsistent at this facility.

One family recounts a frightening incident involving a grandmother who is bedbound and was receiving a bed bath from two nurses. During the procedure, one nurse was engaging in conversation with the patient while the other carried out the washing. The elder said that she didn't look at the talking nurse and that the other nurse left her very soapy and removed all of her rings, valued at about $10,000, during the massage and rinsing. The rings vanished, and the family immediately notified the facility's management, then contacted the police. The police response reportedly stalled because the responding officer was on vacation the next day. The management claimed to have conducted interviews with all staff but no one admitted fault, and the director reportedly avoided the police when called multiple times. This family framed the situation as a grave breach of trust and a symbol of a broader pattern of neglect and theft within the facility, insisting they would pursue media attention and legal action to hold the facility accountable.

That same family also observed a broader culture of alleged theft - the grandmother's experience was described as part of a pattern in which multiple residents' jewelry was reported missing. The family indicated that other residents or their families had told of stolen jewelry, suggesting a systemic issue rather than an isolated incident. The fear expressed was that the facility might be routinely allowing theft by staff, with little to no real mechanism for accountability or protection for residents. The impression given is a facility where theft is not actively deterred and where staff claims are not readily verifiable through transparent investigations.

In parallel, other reviews paint a bleaker picture of daily care and safety. One account describes a partner's experience that includes abusive, short-tempered behavior by a staff member during routine care, to the point of physical abrasiveness while the partner lay in bed for cleaning. The reviewer mentions intervening personally due to the distress it caused, noting visible tears and emotional harm. Another review describes the day of discharge as chaotic and unsafe - the partner was dropped on the floor at the moment of release, only to be promptly returned to bed, with limited accountability afterward. Across these narratives, the recurring themes are insufficient supervision, rough or chaotic handling, and a sense that staff behavior is not consistently held to professional standards or appropriately disciplined when concerns are raised.

There are, however, also testimonies that complicate the picture. A reviewer mentions that some staff members - specifically describing two caregivers, Daisy and Ruby - provided excellent service and were praised for their care, suggesting that the facility can have employees who are competent and compassionate. This points to a mixed environment where positive individual experiences exist alongside systemic problems. Another respondent, who appears to be a family member of a patient with a stroke, says that the care team could be helpful but notes a strong odor and hygiene concerns - clients sitting in their own urine for extended periods, an issue that multiple reviews flag as something the facility should control more effectively. The presence of such contrasting experiences suggests a facility with a wide variance in staff performance and perhaps inconsistent oversight or training.

A segment of the reviews also touches on interpersonal dynamics and cultural tensions. One reviewer claims that the staff were largely Filipino and that a nurse named Charity Anith and a supervisor named Mr. Okay were involved in a dispute concerning their adult daughter, who is young and able to defend herself. The reviewer also raises concerns about racism, favoritism, and a lack of accountability, alleging repeated complaints about a particular nurse and a supervisor that allegedly went unresolved. This thread underscores fears about bias and unequal treatment within care settings, amplifying the feeling that some patients or family members may face additional barriers to having their concerns taken seriously or addressed promptly.

Amidst the negative experiences, another voice highlights resilience and advocacy: a caregiver or relative who describes encounters with staff who were helpful and attentive to a grandfather, noting that the facility's interior appearance did not match the high level of service provided by some employees. This account, although brief, acknowledges that the facility is capable of delivering better care when certain staff members are involved and when families have the opportunity to witness and praise specific acts of kindness and competence. It suggests that the issue is not simply a matter of a single failing department, but rather a spectrum of performance influenced by staffing, workload, communication, and perhaps resource constraints.

Taken together, these reviews present a complex and troubling portrait. There are clear and serious accusations of theft, neglect, and abuse, including alleged jewelry theft from elderly residents and materially unsafe handling during routine caregiving tasks. There are also reports of a smell and hygiene problems that can have real consequences for comfort and health, along with stories of patients being left in distressing situations with insufficient supervision or accountability. Yet there are also glimpses of individuals within the facility who are praised for their compassion and competence, reminding readers that care facilities can and do vary widely in practice from one staff member to another and from one shift to the next.

What remains striking across the accounts is a call for stronger oversight, accountability, and advocacy for residents. Families feel compelled to speak out, pursue media attention, and consider legal avenues because they perceive a lack of satisfactory responses from management and law enforcement. The overarching message is a plea for reform: ensure that residents' safety and dignity are non-negotiable, implement robust processes to prevent theft and abuse, enforce clear consequences for misconduct, and foster a culture where every resident's well-being is the top priority. Until such changes take root, the mixture of worry, frustration, and anger reflected in these stories is unlikely to fade, and many families will continue to question whether Windsor Care Facility is the appropriate setting for their loved ones.

Located in Vallejo, California, this area offers a convenient and accessible range of amenities for senior living. With multiple pharmacies such as Walmart Pharmacy, Walgreens, CVS Pharmacy, and Rite Aid within close proximity, residents have easy access to necessary medications and health supplies. In terms of healthcare, hospitals like Kaiser Permanente Vallejo Medical Center and Sutter Regional Medical Center are nearby for any medical needs. Additionally, there are various physicians' offices including Vallejo Foot & Ankle Clinic and North Bay Pediatrics for specialized care. For leisure activities, there are parks like Hanns Park and Hiddenbrooke Park where seniors can enjoy outdoor activities. A variety of restaurants such as Denny's and Chick-Fil-A provide dining options while cafes like Starbucks offer cozy spots for socializing. Overall, this area provides a mix of healthcare services, entertainment options, and peaceful outdoor spaces suitable for senior living.

Pharmacies

• Walmart Pharmacy (1.5 miles)
• Walgreens (1.5 miles)
• Walgreens (1.8 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (2.8 miles)
• Rite Aid (3.4 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (6 miles)
• Rite Aid (8.7 miles)

Physicians

• Vallejo Foot & Ankle Clinic (1.6 miles)
• Gregory M. Coe, MD (1.7 miles)
• North Bay Orthopaedic Associates (1.8 miles)
• Redwood Eye Center (2.7 miles)
• North Bay Pediatrics (3.8 miles)
• North Bay Pediatrics (6 miles)
• Solano Primary Care (6 miles)

Hospitals

• Kaiser Permanente Vallejo Medical Center (1.6 miles)
• Sutter Regional Medical Center (1.7 miles)
• Sutter Solano Medical Center (1.8 miles)
• Sutter Health (8.5 miles)
• NorthBay Healthcare Foundation (9 miles)
• Sutter Fairfield Medical Campus (11.6 miles)
• Sutter Regional Medical Foundation (11.6 miles)

Restaurants

• Denny's (2.4 miles)
• Sonic Drive-In (2.5 miles)
• In-N-Out Burger (2.5 miles)
• Century Theaters 14 (2.7 miles)
• Chick-Fil-A (2.9 miles)
• Dead Fish (6.5 miles)
• Bear (7.1 miles)

Parks

• Hanns Park (2.8 miles)
• Hiddenbrooke Park (5.2 miles)
• Southampton Park (7.6 miles)
• Shurtleff Park (9.5 miles)
• Fuller Park (10.3 miles)
• Esther Deaver Park (11.2 miles)
• Waterfront Park (11.2 miles)

Cafes

• Starbucks (4.6 miles)
• Starbucks (8.1 miles)
• Starbucks (9.1 miles)
• Starbucks (10.3 miles)
• Valley Cafe (10.3 miles)
• Journey Coffee (11.7 miles)
• Dutch Bros Coffee (11.7 miles)

Transportation

• Napa Jet Center (4.9 miles)
• Martinez Station (MTZ) (11.2 miles)

Places of Worship

• Trinity Faith Baptist Church (7.7 miles)
• St Patrick's Youth Ministry (8.1 miles)
• Napa Community Seventh-day Adventist Church (11.2 miles)

Theaters

• Century Theatres (11.7 miles)