All About You Home Care in Aurora, CO

Pros

• Katherine is absolutely fantastic; she cares about the kids she works with, is smart and friendly, and provides the best possible therapy.
• The family absolutely adores Katherine and thinks the world of her; anyone who works with her is lucky and her work is deeply appreciated.
• Amazing Care's team is truly special, and the company is proud to have them.
• Amazing Care is flexible and caring with its staff and patients; patient care comes first and the team always goes above and beyond.
• Amy provides fabulous care after knee replacement; she is extremely professional, highly skilled, and delivers outstanding patient care; she is flexible with scheduling and puts patients first.
• Amy was a hero during the first weeks post-op.

Cons

• They couldn't treat her mother, and it took two months to inform them.
• Their communication was horrible.
• They were awful people.
• They would not recommend them.
• They were told everything was a go, then told they were in a dead zone.
• The communication was crappy.
• They care more about money than providing quality care.
• They never have anyone on the phone to help, and when they do they treat callers like it's a bother.
• The company does not communicate well with parents.
• The intake coordinator was rude.
• They held the referral for 2.5 hours.
• They had no staffing.

Review

All About You Home Care in Aurora is best suited for families that can tolerate uneven administrative responsiveness and want access to individual clinicians who can deliver solid, hands-on care when they are available. This agency appears capable of pairing clients with practitioners who are skilled and genuinely dedicated, but that depends heavily on whether the right staff are assigned and reachable. For families needing dependable intake, reliable scheduling, and proactive care coordination, this agency represents a high-risk option. Those requirements are non-negotiable for many seniors or medically complex cases, so alternatives with stronger, more consistent onboarding and communication should be seriously considered.

The strongest recurring red flag across reviews is poor communication. Prospective clients should anticipate long delays, frequent contact fragmentation, and difficulty reaching someone who can answer questions or adjust plans. Repeated notes describe being told “everything was go,” only to discover the service never materialized or the patient was left in a “dead zone.” There are explicit complaints about rude intake staff, unanswered calls, and managers who fail to resolve issues after multiple attempts. This reliability gap undermines trust and creates real risk when care needs to be urgent or ongoing.

That said, there are glimmers of value in the clinical arena. A number of reviewers highlight individual clinicians who demonstrate professionalism, warmth, and strong clinical skills. In particular, therapy-related staff receive praise for being flexible, patient-focused, and capable of delivering high-quality care when scheduled. A few testimonials underscore that, when the right clinician is available, patient care can meet or exceed expectations and make a meaningful difference in recovery or daily functioning. Those isolated strengths show that the agency can perform well in a best-case scenario, albeit an accidental one dependent on staff luck and availability.

However, those positive instances fail to offset the chronic service-level shortcomings. The pattern of miscommunication, staffing instability, and inconsistent responsiveness creates a fragile care environment. For seniors who rely on routine, predictability, and timely coordination among home health and support services, the risk of gaps in coverage or delayed care is simply too high. Even when a clinician delivers excellent care, the surrounding administrative framework can erase that value by leaving families guessing about when help will arrive or whether their needs will be met at all.

For families weighing options, the practical path is to demand concrete guarantees up front. Ask for a dedicated care coordinator and a single point of contact with clear escalation steps if responses lag. Require written care plans, prescribed response times, and minimum staffing assurances for daily visits. Request references from families with similar needs and insist on a trial period to test scheduling reliability, communication, and the ability to coordinate multiple disciplines (home health, PT, speech therapy, personal care). If the agency cannot provide these guardrails or demonstrate sustained improvements in intake and dispatch, pivot to safer alternatives.

In the end, All About You Home Care should be approached with caution. For families where dependable communication and consistent staffing are nonnegotiable, the balance of evidence favors seeking alternatives, other home-care providers with transparent intake processes or an assisted-living arrangement that offers predictable oversight. If a family identifies a particular clinician within the agency who has earned their trust and can be scheduled reliably, and if the agency commits to robust, measurable communication standards, there is a pathway to workable care. Until those conditions are met, this option remains a riskier choice for comprehensive senior care.