8918 Woodhall Xing North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55443
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of His Services Home Care
Pros
The facility is neat and the staff are nice.- The owner is educated, knowledgeable, and open.
- The staff and owner make residents feel like family and treat them with respect and warmth.
- Residents are treated with respect and dignity.
- This is how a facility should lookâwell done.
Cons
The staff are described as horrible and should be shut down from dealing with mental patients.- They neglect and mentally abuse residents.
- They kill emotional support animals.
- They sabotage residentsâ placements and punish them by taking away services.
- They yell at residents like children and are very disrespectful.
- They spit on residents and have police called multiple times.
- They fail to provide basic needs, such as groceries and water.
- They abuse other tenants.
Review
This community is best suited for seniors who want a small, home-like environment where warmth from the owner and staff is real and immediate. The standout positive notes describe a neat facility where residents are treated with respect and dignity, and where the owner is described as educated, open, and approachable. For families prioritizing a personable, almost familial atmosphere and a setting that feels less institutional, this place can seem appealing at first glance.
However, serious red flags emerge in the broader feedback. Those considering alternatives should note repeated, high-intensity allegations of neglect, mistreatment, and emotional abuse directed at residents, claims that include hostile behavior, coercion, and punitive practices. Several reviews describe hostile exchanges, yelling, and even actions that are alleged to amount to abuse. The most troubling reports extend beyond occasional friction to systemic concerns about how residents with mental-health needs are treated, and about the safety and well-being of emotional support animals. In light of these accounts, this community should not be considered without rigorous, independent verification of current practices, safety controls, and accountable leadership.
The key pros, neat surroundings, approachable staff, and a sense of family, do not sufficiently counterbalance the cons when patterns of abuse and neglect are alleged by multiple sources. The warmth and respect highlighted by the favorable review can be real, but they appear inconsistent when contrasted with the louder, more troubling testimonies. For a senior who does not require intensive medical or behavioral support, the positive elements might translate into a pleasant day-to-day experience. Yet when safety, mental-health handling, and consistent quality of care are in question, those advantages rapidly erode in importance.
The main drawbacks center on trust and safety. Allegations include neglect, verbal and emotional mistreatment, coercive tactics, and actions perceived as punishing residents by restricting services or privileges. Several reviewers report incidents of aggression toward residents, including feared confrontations and public confrontations that escalate tension rather than de-escalate it. The portrayal of staff behavior toward individuals with mental-health needs, and the claim that emotional-support animals were harmed or not protected, are especially concerning. Given the severity and pervasiveness of these claims, the facilityâs positives cannot reliably offset the risk.
From a decision-making standpoint, these factors point to a cautious, almost precautionary approach. The warmth of the staff and the personal touch may entice families seeking a âhomeyâ vibe, but the potential for neglect or abuse, and the reported mishandling of sensitive needs, makes this option inadvisable for most seniors, especially those with mental-health considerations, cognitive impairment, or heavy medical support requirements. Prospective residents who insist on pursuing this site should demand comprehensive, third-party confirmation of licensing, a transparent care plan, a current, strengthened grievance process, and unrestricted access to independent advocates during a trial period.
In conclusion, this community is not a routine fit for families seeking reliable, abuse-free, medically supervised care. It may be appropriate only for a highly specific subset, those who can tolerate uncertainty in behavioral management and who insist on non-negotiable safeguards such as independent oversight and binding accountability measures. For most seniors, alternatives with clearer disciplinary standards, demonstrable safety records, and consistent, compassionate care across all staff should be prioritized. Before choosing, families should visit with a critical eye, request state inspection reports and staff credentials, seek multiple first-hand references, and compare neighboring options that offer transparent governance and verifiable quality metrics.
21 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Beauty salon
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Kitchenette
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
Minneapolis-St Paul International (18 miles away)
24-hour call system
Activities of daily living assistance
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Mental wellness program
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
Funding and Affording Assisted Living: A Thorough Overview
Assisted Living Expenses and Long-Term Care Insurance: A Comprehensive Exploration
Securing Financial Support for Assisted Living: A Comprehensive Overview