Our House Adult Day Care Ctr

Pros

• The staff are nice and helpful.
• The workers are great, the property is beautiful, and they clearly care about the residents.
• The staff are loved for the way they treat the residents.
• The place is wonderful to be involved with, with residents and staff who are highly regarded.
• There are great events and activities for residents.
• The ranch-style atmosphere provides lots of room to roam and keeps residents busy.
• The staff feel their job is rewarding, noting that clients are friendly and helpful.
• The facility added a shade overhang for the cottages, addressing concerns and improving comfort.

Cons

• The cottage was dirty and had a strong, unpleasant odor.
• Supervisors displayed unprofessional and troubling behavior.
• Racist attitudes and remarks toward Black staff members were observed.
• These behaviors were ignored or tolerated by the owners.
• There was little regard for staff safety.
• Clients were allowed to mistreat or attack staff with no consequences.
• The owner was dismissed and unprofessional.
• Clients were routinely served cold-cut sandwiches every day.
• Staff neglected basic hygiene tasks, such as brushing clients' teeth.
• Educational programs were repetitive with no real engagement or growth.
• Favoritism was a constant issue, creating an extremely toxic environment.
• The administration lacked integrity and care for staff, with disrespect and favoritism toward insiders.

Review

Accounts from various witnesses paint a deeply troubling picture of the facility, dominated by concerns about safety, dignity, and professionalism. The setting itself is described as dirty and poorly maintained, with a cottage that reeked and failed to meet basic cleanliness standards. Beyond the physical conditions, the atmosphere is said to be steeped in unacceptable behavior from some supervisors and a management team that appears either indifferent or unresponsive to serious complaints. The tone of these reports suggests that residents and staff alike shoulder a culture where basic care and respect are inconsistently valued.

Racial dynamics emerge as a central thread in several of the more serious allegations. According to witnesses, racist attitudes and remarks directed at Black staff members were observed and, in some cases, tolerated by the owners. This perceived tolerance of discriminatory behavior is described as not only disappointing but as a fundamental breach of the standards one would expect in a care setting. The owners themselves are repeatedly portrayed as dismissive and disengaged from day-to-day care, with anecdotes about casual, unprofessional conduct - such as walking around in flip-flops with the belly exposed - that underscore a broader concern about leadership and accountability.

Safety and the treatment of staff are highlighted as particularly alarming. Reports claim that staff safety is given little regard, with clients allegedly allowed to mistreat or even attack staff without consequences. The impression left is that the environment is volatile and under-supervised, with the owners or managers failing to intervene in a timely or adequate manner. The sense of neglect extends to medical concerns as well: nurses are described as ignoring injuries or avoiding hospital visits when needed, a serious shortfall in care that threatens resident well-being. There are also troubling notes about the physical spaces, including the pool, where hygiene is lacking and there are persistent concerns that clients frequently defecate or urinate in the water, presenting clear health risks.

Food, hygiene, and daily routines are another focal point of criticism. One persistent claim is that residents are repeatedly served cold-cut sandwiches, raising questions about nutrition and food safety. Basic hygiene tasks - such as brushing residents' teeth - are described as neglected, signaling a broader pattern of insufficient attention to daily care. The educational programs, like the Workshop, are criticized for repetitive, unengaging content that offers little opportunity for genuine growth or development. In addition, favoritism is described as a constant issue, creating a toxic environment where staff morale and teamwork suffer, and where relationships with residents can become strained or uneven.

Despite the breadth of negative experiences, there are also notes of positive engagement and appreciation. A number of statements underscore the dedication of staff who are seen as kind, helpful, and capable of providing meaningful interaction with residents. Some reviewers describe the property as well maintained and note that it is clear staff care about the residents. There are expressions of admiration for individual members of the team, with phrases like "the workers are great," "I love the staff and the way they treat the residents," and references to enjoying the ranch-like atmosphere and the opportunity for residents to roam and stay active. A music therapist and other supportive roles are singled out with positive mentions, suggesting that there are bright spots amid ongoing concerns.

There is also a sense of inconsistency in administration and governance. Several comments speak to a lack of integrity and fairness in management, with claims that staff could be disrespected or taken advantage of unless they were part of a "favorite" circle or family connections. Some reviewers report a perception that there are no cameras to monitor activity, which compounds fears about what might be happening behind closed doors. Yet there are counterpoints noting that the facility has made improvements, such as installing a new screen cover overhang in 2022 to provide shade for residents outdoors, indicating that attempts to address certain issues were followed through with concrete changes.

Overall, the accounts convey a facility whose strengths appear to lie in the dedication of several staff members, the care some residents receive, and the occasional improvements to infrastructure. However, these positives coexist with a constellation of serious concerns: racial bias and disrespect, safety lapses, neglect of medical and daily care needs, questionable food quality, and a culture that can feel toxic and dismissive toward those it serves and those who work there. For anyone considering involvement with this facility, the stories suggest a need for careful, critical evaluation of the current climate, the efficacy of leadership, and the extent to which basic standards of care, safety, and respect are actually upheld on a day-to-day basis.

Physicians

• Island Doctors (0.5 miles)
• Surgical Associates of North Florida (0.5 miles)
• Internal Medicine Associates (0.5 miles)
• Internal Medicine Associates Of St Johns County PA (0.5 miles)
• Thousand Robert R III DDS (0.5 miles)
• Community Podiatry & Wound Care, P.A. (0.5 miles)
• Community Podiatry & Wound Clinic- Dr R. Rodriguez (0.5 miles)

Restaurants

• McDonald's (0.6 miles)
• Culver's (1 miles)
• Carrabba's Italian Grill (1.5 miles)
• Chili's Grill & Bar (1.5 miles)
• Cantina Louie (1.5 miles)
• Applebee's (1.5 miles)
• Wendy's (1.6 miles)

Hospitals

• St Augustine Surgery Center (1.3 miles)

Pharmacies

• Moultrie Pharmacy (1.3 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (1.4 miles)
• Rx-Mart Pharmacy (1.8 miles)
• Winn-Dixie (2.4 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (3.2 miles)
• Winn-Dixie (3.5 miles)

Cafes

• Kekes Breakfast Café (1.5 miles)
• Panera Bread (1.5 miles)
• The Kookaburra (3.4 miles)
• Relampago Coffee Lab (3.4 miles)
• Starbucks (3.4 miles)
• The Kookaburra (3.5 miles)
• Beachside Diner (3.6 miles)

Parks

• Dr Robert B. Hayling Freedom Park (2.3 miles)
• Ron Parker Park (3 miles)
• Maria Sanchez Lake (3.2 miles)
• Anastasia State Park (3.5 miles)

Places of Worship

• Memorial Presbyterian Church (3.4 miles)