12800 Cherry Ave, Rapid City, MI 49676
To contact a resident: (231) 322-4444
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
South Torch Assisted Living, LLC Costs & Pricing
South Torch Assisted Living, LLC offers a studio accommodation at a monthly cost of $4,750, which reflects the premium services and amenities provided to residents. This rate is notably higher than the average monthly cost in Kalkaska County, which stands at $4,518, and significantly exceeds the statewide average for Michigan at $3,824. While these figures may suggest a higher investment at South Torch, they also indicate a commitment to delivering exceptional care and an enriched living experience that justifies the additional expense. Residents can expect not only comfortable living spaces but also personalized support tailored to their needs in a warm and inviting environment.
| Floor plans | South Torch Assisted Living, LLC | Kalkaska County | Michigan |
|---|---|---|---|
| Studio | $4,750 | $4,518 | $3,824 |
Overall Review of South Torch Assisted Living, LLC
Cons
The staff do not move from their chairs unless they go to smoke and seem bothered to help residents.
The staff have very little training in caring for the elderly or basic care.
Showers are offered only twice a week, leaving residents odorous due to poor bathing.
There are no activities or outings provided for residents.
Meals are prepared from boxes and processed foodsânothing fresh.
Review
This community is best suited for families who are navigating extremely tight options and are prepared to take an unusually hands-on role in daily care. The current information suggests a setting where the standard of care hinges on constant family oversight rather than proactive, attentive staff. In practice, it is likely to be of interest only to those who can tolerate minimal staff engagement, limited personal care, and an environment where hygiene routines and daily structure appear lacking. For families seeking reassurance that a resident will receive consistent, dignified care with regular social engagement, this option should be filtered out early in the decision process.
The most alarming takeaways center on care quality and daily living routines. Staff are described as staying seated most of the time, except for smoke breaks, and appear bothered by requests for help. The claimed lack of training for elderly care, coupled with a schedule of showers only twice weekly, points to a neglectful approach to fundamental needs. Odor and cleanliness concerns underline potential hygiene gaps, while the absence of activities or outings indicates a missed opportunity for social stimulation and cognitive engagement. Meals described as box or processed items further underscore a pattern of low-nutrient, unvaried nutrition that fails to meet basic senior dietary standards.
Given the review, there are effectively no redeeming factors documented that would offset these critical concerns. There are no highlighted strengths in programming, engagement, or staff responsiveness to soften the impact of poor bathing routines, limited supervision, or subpar meals. The absence of any positive qualifiers means the negatives do not find balance in the daily lived experience described. In practical terms, the downsides outweigh any potential cost savings or convenience, making this community difficult to recommend for most families seeking a stable, respectful home for an elder.
Families evaluating this facility should insist on concrete, verifiable assurances before considering placement. Ask for a tour of real-time hours and routines, not pamphlets. Request a direct look at how personal care is delivered during a typical shift, including shower frequency, dignity-preserving assistance, and skin and odor management. Seek current resident or family testimonies about consistency of care, responsiveness to requests, and the quality of meals. If the responses are vague, defensive, or inconsistent, that is a red flag signaling deeper systemic issues.
Alternatives warrant serious consideration, particularly communities with demonstrated staffing stability, trained geriatric care competency, regular bathing and hygiene practices, an active social calendar, and fresh, balanced meals. When comparing options, prioritize measurable metrics: staff-to-resident ratios, training credentials, scheduled activities, and sample menus. A transparent management team willing to provide audit-ready records, and resident care plans reviewed by a licensed professional, can make a decisive difference. In other words, look for environments where essential daily needs are reliably met, and where engagement and nourishment are actively cultivated rather than assumed.
In conclusion, South Torch Assisted Living in Rapid City presents a care profile that is best avoided for families seeking reliable, respectful, and stimulating senior living. The combination of disengaged staff, minimal training, poor bathing routines, hygiene concerns, and lack of social programming creates a risk that outweighs any potential convenience or cost consideration. This facility is best regarded as a last-resort option only if every other viable community has been exhausted and there remains a plan for intensive, ongoing family oversight and supplementary care. For the majority of families, pursuing alternatives that guarantee consistent care standards and meaningful daily life should be the default course.




















8 Key Indicators That Suggest It May Be Time to Transition from Assisted Living to Skilled Nursing Care
Vibrant Senior Living: A Comprehensive Guide for Active Older Adults
When to Transition from Assisted Living to Memory Care: Key Indicators, Steps, and Finding the Right Community








