Everling's Boarding Home in Greene, NY

Cons

• The owner cares nothing for the residents and is only after money.
• The staff delayed calling EMTs after the grandmother fell.
• The grandmother was mistreated after having an accident in her bed.
• The owner opened the bedroom window despite freezing temperatures outside.
• The owner keeps the home temperature below 70 degrees to avoid paying for heat.
• Residents pay $1800+ per month for care.
• The facility should be shut down.

Review

This community is best suited for no one seeking safe, respectful elder care. Everling's Boarding Home in Greene, NY, is described in a way that signals severe safety and dignity concerns rather than genuine support for frail or vulnerable residents. The account points to neglectful oversight, questionable priorities, and a troubling lack of accountability, making it inappropriate for any senior who depends on reliable supervision and timely help. Families should recognize this as a stark warning: intimate, small-home settings can look protective, yet fail catastrophically when staffing and safety are not solides.

Those evaluating placement should explicitly consider alternatives from the outset. Licensed assisted living communities with trained staff, 24/7 oversight, and documented safety protocols offer a fundamentally different standard. If a family prefers in-home care, partnering with reputable home-care agencies that provide background-checked caregivers and clear supervision is essential. State licensing records and inspection reports should be consulted early, and comparisons should be drawn against facilities known for consistent responsiveness, proper temperature controls, and humane handling of accidents or incontinence. In short, seek options with proven, verifiable quality and accountability.

There are virtually no redeeming features documented here to offset the serious concerns. The setting might be superficially appealing due to its small, home-like scale, but that advantage evaporates under the weight of reported neglect and mismanagement. The absence of any credible positives - no mention of trained medical support, no reliable emergency response, and no demonstrated adherence to basic resident dignity - means any potential comfort of a cozier environment is overwhelmed by safety risks and poor care.

The main cons presented are systemic and grave. A resident, described as a 92-year-old grandmother, endured a fall and a delayed emergency response, with subsequent reports of mistreatment after an incontinence incident. The owner's decisions - keeping temperatures unreasonably low to trim heating costs and opening windows in cold weather - suggest a disregard for thermal comfort and safety. With five residents paying more than $1,800 each month, the mismatch between cost and care quality is stark. The overall narrative signals an environment where basic protections, timely assistance, and respectful treatment are not reliably upheld.

For families still weighing options, the response is practical and non-negotiable: insist on transparent, objective criteria before any move. Demand licensing verification, clear staff-to-resident ratios, emergency call procedures, and documented training in infection control, fall prevention, and elder dignity. Ask to review inspection reports, recent incident logs, and visit the facility multiple times at different hours to observe responsiveness. If concerns arise, contact state agencies or ombudsmen to verify compliance history. There is no justification for risking a loved one's safety when safer, well-regulated options are accessible.

move away from this facility and prioritize options with proven safety, oversight, and compassionate care. If already engaged in placement there, begin planning a transition to a facility with licensed oversight and positive reviews, or arrange a reputable in-home care plan with verifiable credentials. The negative pattern described points to a facility that fails at the most basic expectations of elder care. In choosing care, reliability, trained staff, and demonstrable safety standards must come first, and that standard is not met here.

Places of Worship

• Immaculate Conception Rectory (2.1 miles)
• Immaculate Conception Church (2.1 miles)
• Christian & Missionary Alliance (2.4 miles)
• New York Ministry Network Royal Rangers (4.3 miles)
• The Palyul Retreat Center (9.7 miles)
• United Methodist Church (13.4 miles)
• United Church UCC (13.6 miles)

Restaurants

• The Silo Restaurant (6.5 miles)
• Sacred Heart Ukrainian Picnic Grounds (8.8 miles)
• Beer Tree Brew Co. (9.4 miles)
• McGirk's Irish Pub (10.3 miles)
• Apple Hills Farm (10.6 miles)
• Jones Humdinger (10.7 miles)
• Best Bagels In Town (10.8 miles)

Parks

• Chenango Valley State Park (6.8 miles)
• Otsiningo Park (14 miles)
• Cfj Park (15.3 miles)

Physicians

• Chenango Bridge Medical (10.3 miles)
• UHS Primary Care (11.3 miles)
• Lourdes Family Practice (12.1 miles)
• Lourdes (12.1 miles)
• Oxford Family Health (13.9 miles)
• V A Binghamton Clinic (14.2 miles)
• Primary Care Associates (14.2 miles)

Pharmacies

• CVS Pharmacy (11.4 miles)
• Bartles Pharmacy (13.7 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (14.5 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (15.2 miles)
• Walmart Pharmacy (15.3 miles)
• Walgreens (15.6 miles)
• Wegmans (15.6 miles)

Hospitals

• Lourdes Health Support (11.9 miles)
• New York State Inebriate Asylum (14.2 miles)
• Binghamton Psychiatric Center (14.2 miles)
• Our Lady of Lourdes Memorial Hospital (14.2 miles)
• Lourdes Hospital (14.3 miles)
• Lourdes Hospital (14.7 miles)
• Robert M. Best Cardiac Care Unit - UHS Wilson Regional Medical Center (15.3 miles)

Cafes

• Starbucks (13 miles)