Tammy & Marty's Cozy Adult Home

Pros

• The couple who owns the place seemed like a good fit.

Cons

• The staff are rude to residents.
• The staff are lazy and there is no accountability because the manager hires her family.
• Urine and feces are left in restrooms used by residents and it dries there.
• Residents are required to sign a 35-page contract that the facility cannot follow.
• They claim it is illegal to perform CPR on residents, delaying emergency aid.
• Residents lose weight because dietary needs and restrictions are not met.
• They ignore notes from physical therapists and physicians regarding care needs.
• They use dollar-store cleaners instead of healthcare-grade cleaners.
• They violated HIPAA by audio- and video-recording common areas without notifying anyone.
• They yell at residents.
• The owners are manipulative and rude and do not follow the contract.
• The facility is not clean, with fecal matter left on shower chairs during showers.
• A staff member insulted a reviewer by implying gender-based insults and belittling men.
• The reviewer had to pull their sister out due to safety and care concerns.

Review

From the moment the stories begin, a consistent thread runs through these accounts: a facility that is widely perceived as unsafe, unsanitary, and poorly managed, with residents treated more like inconveniences than people in need of compassionate care. The writers describe staff who are rude and dismissive, and a management style that feels nepotistic and unaccountable because the manager has hired and kept family members in key roles. The sense of loyalty to family and a promise to help loved ones is undermined by what many readers hear as a pattern of neglect and favoritism, making it hard to trust that anyone would be fired or held to account for serious lapses in care.

Cleanliness and basic hygiene are repeatedly called into question. One narrator says restrooms are left with urine and feces that dry on surfaces, a situation that residents are forced to use despite the odor and unsanitary conditions. The same thread of complaint extends to the showers, where fecal matter allegedly remains on shower chairs, signaling a routine lack of thorough cleaning. The perceived cleanliness problems are linked to deeper concerns about safety and health: residents losing weight because dietary needs and restrictions aren't met, and notes from physical therapists and physicians being ignored, resulting in care plans that are not followed. The facility is described as an assisted living environment that should adhere to higher healthcare standards, yet reviewers feel it relies on budget cleaners rather than healthcare-grade products, undermining the quality of care.

The care failures are framed as not just occasional oversights but systemic issues with accountability. A 35-page contract that residents supposedly cannot follow is cited as evidence of a mismatched or poorly communicated agreement, with claims that staff or leadership cannot even adhere to the terms they lay out. Aggressive concerns about patient safety are paired with a troubling claim that CPR would not be performed because of a policy or belief that it would be illegal or inappropriate to do so unless emergency responders arrive. Such assertions, if true, would represent an unacceptable delay in life-saving care and a stark departure from standard expectations for any health- or elder-care setting. The writers suggest they pressed these concerns by filing complaints with the Colorado Department of Health and Environment and by contacting an ombudsman, and that changes only appeared after significant external pressure.

In addition to general care and safety issues, the narrative includes a drumbeat of HIPAA-related concerns and privacy infringements. It is alleged that the facility engaged in audio and video recording of common areas without notifying residents, a practice that would violate privacy norms and laws until the owners began to post signs indicating recordings. The sense of relief and resolve that comes from finally seeing some policy changes - however late they may have been - does not erase the impression that earlier behavior was intrusive and inappropriate, or that residents' private lives were not adequately protected.

Beyond the broader operational failures, the accounts include deeply personal and emotional episodes that reinforce the overall distrust. One reviewer recounts a situation where a loved one's weight and dietary needs were not managed properly, necessitating the person's return home on multiple occasions. Documentation from therapists and physicians was not acted upon, and there is a sense that the facility's initial claims of competence were contradicted by day-to-day realities of care. The perception of manipulation and hostility from owners - described as rude, hard to reason with, and capable of undermining the autonomy of residents - adds another layer of concern for families already dealing with vulnerable relatives.

A particularly troubling segment concerns a family member with autism, where the narrative moves from concern to alarm in a way that feels intimate and painful. The sister, who has autism, is described as being exposed to guidance or behavior from staff that suggested the family's concerns were not being treated with appropriate seriousness. The staff allegedly told the sister that the narrator was a man and that men are mean, a remark that underscores fears about exploitation or undue influence over someone with developmental challenges. The writer says they ultimately pulled their sister out of the facility and had to safeguard personal items - like hair clippers - because of ongoing concerns about safety and harm. The couple who owned the place appeared initially like a good fit, but the fit proved unsatisfactory for this family, leaving them convinced that the arrangement would not be appropriate for others in similar situations, even if it might work for some.

Taken together, these experiences create a sweeping and cautionary portrait. The reviewers repeatedly urge readers not to place loved ones in this facility, emphasizing that the combination of poor cleanliness, neglect of medical and dietary needs, documentation and contract issues, privacy concerns, and troubling interpersonal dynamics makes the environment seem unsafe and unreliably managed. They insist that the harm goes beyond mere dissatisfaction and enters the realm of real risk, especially for residents who cannot advocate effectively for themselves.

In the end, the overarching message is one of strong warning and firm opposition to placement in this particular setting. The writers express a clear fear about the well-being and safety of residents under the facility's care, citing both specific incidents and a broader culture of management that appears resistant to accountability. They stress that the consequences of staying in such an environment can be severe, and they urge families to seek safer, more trustworthy options, to verify every contractual term and policy independently, and to demand transparent communication and demonstrable adherence to healthcare standards. If there is any takeaway, it's a vehement caution: do not underestimate the potential for harm when care environments fail basic cleanliness, safety, and ethical standards.

This part of Pueblo, Colorado, offers a convenient location with a variety of amenities nearby. There are several physicians' offices within close proximity, including pediatricians and primary care providers. Additionally, there are numerous restaurants to choose from, ranging from fast food options like Wendy's and McDonald's to local eateries like Pass Key Restaurant and Pho 50. Places of worship are also easily accessible in the area for spiritual needs. Several pharmacies are available for medication needs, as well as hospitals for medical emergencies or ongoing care. Lastly, there are cafes such as Starbucks for socializing or enjoying a cup of coffee. Overall, this part of Pueblo provides a mix of essential services and conveniences that could make it a desirable location for senior living.

Physicians

• Small World Pediatrics (0.5 miles)
• McCreight Kasey Scott MD Parkview Family Medicine (1.2 miles)
• Hanson Clinic (2.5 miles)
• Pueblo West Primary Care (2.5 miles)
• Retina Consultants of Southern Colorado PC (4.8 miles)
• Maple Leaf Orthopedics (4.9 miles)
• Pueblo Cardiology (4.9 miles)

Restaurants

• Pass Key Restaurant (1.4 miles)
• Pho 50 (2.5 miles)
• Wendy's (2.6 miles)
• McDonald's (2.8 miles)
• Nature and Raptor Center of Pueblo (5 miles)
• Park East Restaurant (6.4 miles)
• Pizza Hut (6.5 miles)

Places of Worship

• Southern Baptist Convention (1.9 miles)
• Jehovah's Witnesses North Pueblo West Congregation (2.3 miles)
• Church (5.2 miles)
• 186 K Student Ministries (5.2 miles)
• Lady Of The Meadows (6.4 miles)
• Temple Baptist Church (6.8 miles)
• Victory World Outreach of Pueblo (7.3 miles)

Pharmacies

• Walgreens (2.7 miles)
• Safeway Pharmacy (2.9 miles)
• Walgreens (6.4 miles)
• Walmart Pharmacy (6.6 miles)
• Albertsons Pharmacy (6.6 miles)
• Sav-On Pharmacy (6.6 miles)
• Strawberry Fields (7.2 miles)

Hospitals

• Parkview West (2.7 miles)
• I Care Vision Center (6.5 miles)
• Association-Independent Dentst (6.6 miles)
• Cmhip Hsfi (6.6 miles)
• Open Mri of Pueblo (6.7 miles)
• Children's Hospital (7.2 miles)
• Southern Colorado Clinic Urgent Care (7.4 miles)

Cafes

• Starbucks (6.6 miles)
• Starbucks (7.1 miles)
• Starbucks (7.2 miles)