Carondelet Retirement

Pros

• The staff is amazing and they care greatly for the residents.
• The facility's location is good, the food is delicious, and the building is kept up very well.
• Cleanliness is highly valued by the manager, contributing to a well-maintained environment.
• Staff members look after their patients, and medicines are delivered in a timely manner.
• Residents have been cared for better here than at many other facilities.
• The meals are described as delicious.

Cons

• The facility is not suitable for healthy individuals or anyone needing assistance with functioning or full medication compliance.
• It is described as a group home for people with disabilities that require accountability, not a retirement facility.
• The promise of round-the-clock nursing staff is a fallacy, with a nurse on-site only twice a week and not supervising medications.
• Medications are allegedly left on residents' dressers or not consistently distributed.
• The food and meals are abysmal, with nutritionally lacking fare and weak beverages.
• Residents share bathrooms and communal spaces, indicating limited privacy.
• There are reports that stronger mentally healthy residents prey on weaker ones, compromising safety.
• There were incidents of unsafe medication handling leading to ER visits and hospital admissions.
• A specific incident described doors left open with residents outside and no staff nearby, indicating neglect.
• Hygiene concerns were raised, including a hair on a breakfast plate and lack of hair nets.

Review

The collection of reviews presents a complicated and conflicted picture of a facility described as a group home for people with disabilities, not a retirement enclave. Several reviewers stress that this is not a place for someone who is healthy or able to manage daily living on their own, and they emphasize that residents arrive here because they require ongoing supervision and accountability. The overarching message from many voices is that the level of care, safety, and day-to-day operations varies widely and is often far from dependable. In some accounts, residents or their families feel they found a supportive environment; in others, they describe scary lapses in care and serious neglect that put vulnerable individuals at risk.

A prominent theme is inadequate medical oversight and inconsistent medication management. A number of reviewers insist that nursing staff are not available around the clock and that nurse visits are limited to state requirements, typically twice a week. They recount scenes where medications are left unsecured on a resident's dresser, or where staff at the time "offer" a dose without any reliable system to ensure it is actually taken. One account details a resident who missed important doses, leading to erratic behavior and safety concerns for others; the family member describes an ER visit and a lengthy hospitalization later, followed by placement in a facility with tighter patient-care controls. Another review highlights the discrepancy between what staff claim and what actually happens, noting that the kitchen or support staff sometimes administers medications without proper supervision. The repeated thread is a lack of consistent, accountable medication distribution and monitoring, with some families feeling that medication management is neglected or unreliable.

Food and nutrition are identified as another weak point by multiple reviewers. Several accounts describe meals that range from inconsequential to frankly unappetizing, with breakfast described as "a bagel and a banana" served alongside watered-down Kool-Aid. In contrast, at least one dinner is praised for salmon croquettes and baked potatoes, but even that positive note is tempered by complaints about tasteless drinks and insufficient variety. Some reviewers report no opportunity for seconds, limiting residents' access to nourishment, while others suggest that overall nutrition is inadequate or inconsistent. The sense conveyed is that meals do not consistently meet basic expectations for quality or quantity, contributing to a perception of neglect in daily living.

Safety and the physical living environment appear to be areas of particular concern in several reviews. There are alarming anecdotes about doors being left open, residents wandering outside unsupervised, and the back door also unsecured at times. The impression is that staffing levels are insufficient to supervise a building with 32 residents living in about 5,000 square feet, which translates into a crowded, under-supervised, and potentially chaotic environment. The most disturbing statements describe days when no ambulance or emergency response is available, or when staff coverage is inconsistent, leading to dangerous situations where residents might be unsafe both inside the building and in shared spaces like the TV room or smoking areas. The shared bathroom setup and private rooms are noted, with some reviewers implying that the lack of robust supervision could lead to conflicts or unsafe incidents among residents who have varying levels of mental health or cognitive needs.

There are also stark contrasts between experiences, underscoring the variability within the facility. One reviewer, speaking as a resident, reports that staff are amazing, the location is convenient, and the building is clean, with timely administration of medications and attentive care from the manager. This perspective stands in direct opposition to other accounts that paint a picture of a for-profit operation with insufficient assistance, where a single nurse aide covers many responsibilities, and where nutrition, safety, and medical oversight are severely wanting. The diversity of experiences suggests that conditions can shift dramatically depending on who is on duty, what shifts are covered, and how closely the facility adheres to established protocols.

Another angle in the reviews is financial and governance-related concern, which surfaces most clearly in a strongly negative account describing the home as a for-profit operation with insufficient staffing and questionable dietary practices. The reviewer asserts suspicions that money is being misused or pocketed, notes that the facility fails to provide adequate minutes for residents' meals, and calls for investigations. The address cited in this account adds a concrete point of reference that amplifies the urgency of the concerns raised. While this lone review is vehement in its accusations, it stands alongside other comments that emphasize nutrition, care, and safety as areas for serious scrutiny, regardless of the facility's business model.

Taken together, the reviews present a landscape of mixed experiences that resist easy conclusions. Some residents and families describe a supportive staff who take their roles seriously, maintain cleanliness, and deliver medications on time, contributing to a sense of stability and good care. Others recount alarming lapses - unmonitored medications, unsafe door practices, neglected nutrition, and insufficient staff oversight - that threaten safety and well-being. The shared takeaway is that potential residents and their loved ones should undertake a thorough, hands-on assessment before choosing to relocate someone here. A careful walkthrough, a review of staffing ratios, medication protocols, emergency response procedures, and daily routines could reveal whether the facility's operations align with the level of care required. The stories collectively urge prospective families to look beyond glossy marketing and seek concrete evidence of consistent staffing, reliable medication administration, safe living conditions, and nutritious meals to truly determine whether this environment can meet the specific needs of a vulnerable individual.

This part of St. Louis, Missouri, offers a variety of amenities that cater to senior living. With several parks in close proximity such as Carondelet Park and Grant's Trail, residents can enjoy leisurely walks and outdoor activities. There are also numerous restaurants and cafes nearby offering convenient dining options. In terms of healthcare, there are several pharmacies and hospitals within a short distance, providing easy access to medical services. Additionally, there are places of worship for those seeking spiritual fulfillment. Transportation options such as Amtrak and the Zooline Railroad offer convenient travel opportunities for seniors looking to explore the area. Overall, this part of St. Louis provides a well-rounded community with a range of services and facilities that would appeal to older individuals considering senior living options in the area.

Parks

• Carondelet Park (0.6 miles)
• Grant's Trail (2.5 miles)
• Willmore Park (3 miles)
• Jefferson Barracks County Park (3.2 miles)
• Francis Park (3.3 miles)
• Tower Grove Park (3.7 miles)
• Bar K (4.5 miles)

Restaurants

• Riverside Diner (1 miles)
• The Beerhouse (1.8 miles)
• Friendly's Bar And Grill (1.8 miles)
• McDonald's (1.9 miles)
• The Civil Life Brewing Company (2.5 miles)
• La Catrinas (2.9 miles)
• City Park Grill (3.3 miles)

Pharmacies

• Walgreens (1.6 miles)
• Schnucks Lemay (2.1 miles)
• Walgreens (2.2 miles)
• Walgreens (2.3 miles)
• Walgreens (2.7 miles)
• Walgreens (3.4 miles)
• Dierbergs Markets (3.6 miles)

Hospitals

• St Alexius Hospital (2.4 miles)
• Jefferson Barracks VA Medical Center (4.5 miles)
• SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center (4.7 miles)
• The Rehabilitation Institute of St Louis (5.7 miles)
• St Louis Children's Hospital (5.7 miles)

Places of Worship

• St Johns Lutheran Church (2.5 miles)
• St Raphael the Archangel Church (3 miles)
• St Matthias Catholic Church (4.2 miles)
• St Ambrose Church (4.3 miles)
• Peace Lutheran Church & Preschool (4.8 miles)
• Old Orchard Church (5.3 miles)

Physicians

• Southwest Medical Center (4.1 miles)
• Kebler, Robert Suburban Pediatrics (5.5 miles)
• Barnes-Jewish Hospital (5.5 miles)
• BJC Behavioral Health Service - Dinu Petru Gangure MD (6 miles)

Transportation

• Jet Aviation (5.4 miles)
• Amtrak (5.5 miles)
• Zooline Railroad The Wild (5.9 miles)

Cafes

• Starbucks (5.6 miles)
• Starbucks (5.9 miles)