15 Village Street, Lisbon, ME 04250
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Supported Living Program
Pros
The reviewer considers themselves a great tenant.
Cons
The application for Lisbon Senior Village was never received after a month of waiting, despite assurances it was mailed.- The customer service is terrible.
- The management would likely be unhelpful if something went wrong with the apartments.
- The place is terrible.
- The building used to have bed bugs and roaches.
- There was drug activity on the property in the past.
Review
Lisbon Senior Village’s Supported Living Program is best suited for seniors who prioritize affordability and the option to live independently, even if that means accepting limited responsiveness from management. In practical terms, this community appears to serve residents who can tolerate administrative delays and a hands-off approach from on-site staff while seeking a lower-cost housing pathway rather than full-service, high-touch assisted living. The core appeal is not concierge support or consistently proactive management, but the potential for a simpler, more economical living arrangement for those who can navigate bumps in service without fracturing their day-to-day routines.
Those who should seriously consider alternatives are families and residents who require reliable application processing, timely communication, and a predictable, well-maintained environment. The reviews point to a troubling pattern of customer service missteps and operational bottlenecks, most notably slow or non-existent responses to application requests and unclear mailing processes. When a prospective tenant cannot even get an application mailed promptly, the implication is a broader risk of ongoing responsiveness gaps once tenancy begins. For households prioritizing documentation, scheduling, and transparent administrative flow, other communities will clearly outperform this option.
The limited positives are hard to separate from the notable drawbacks, and the balance heavily tilts toward caution. If the program’s affordability and the prospect of independent living matter most, these are meaningful upsides only insofar as they are attainable without having to wrestle with chronic miscommunication or a fragile administrative framework. In contrast, the main cons, delayed applications, misrouted mail, and a history of service delays, undercut any financial appeal by eroding trust and creating ongoing friction for residents and families attempting to coordinate moves, payments, or care arrangements. The potential cost advantage does not fully offset the risk of inconsistent support, broken processes, and a fragile resident experience.
The negative experiences cited are concrete. One reviewer describes repeated efforts to obtain an application, with messages left unanswered for a month and mail permanently misdirected to Lewiston, casting doubt on the reliability of any supposed centralized administration. A second reviewer, who once lived there, recalls a time when the property suffered infestations and unsafe conditions, with bed bugs, roaches, and drug activity reported in the past. While the current status is uncertain, the weight of these memories matters for families assessing ongoing safety, cleanliness, and the credibility of on-site management. Taken together, these reviews suggest a pattern that cannot be dismissed as a one-off.
In deciding whether to pursue this community, families should demand concrete, up-to-date information before making any commitment. Request a current occupancy and maintenance report, a fresh pest-control schedule and inspections, and a written promise of responsive communication that includes explicit timelines. Speak with current residents about how quickly issues are addressed, and verify that the office handles applications, deposits, and move-in planning with clarity. Inspect the units in person, review recent state or local inspections, and ask for a tour that includes not just common spaces but also movement through the administrative process so there is a real sense of flow and accountability.
Ultimately, this community leans toward a choice for affordability with tangible tensions around management reliability and safety. If cost savings and independence are the primary drivers, a careful, carefully scoped trial period might be considered, but only after rigorous verification of current operations and a clear, enforceable expectation of improved responsiveness. For most families seeking steadier, higher-quality management, clearer communication, and a consistently clean environment, alternatives with proven administrative reliability and pest-control protocols are the more prudent path.
5 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
24-hour supervision
Activities of daily living assistance
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
Comprehensive Insights into Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and Their Assessment
Medicare Coverage for Assisted Living: An In-Depth Exploration
Your Comprehensive Guide to Luxury Assisted Living: Elevated Facilities, Amenities, and Costs