New Friends Memory and Residential Care of Florence

Pros

• New Friends Memory care is awesome.
• Melissa and Ellie made the transfer smooth for the reviewer’s brother.
• The staff are very friendly and attentive.
• His room looks like a little studio apartment.
• The housing grounds are well maintained.
• There aren’t a lot of people there, so residents receive extra special attention.
• The caregivers are outstanding and very responsive to residents’ needs.
• The reviewer would recommend placement here with confidence that a loved one will be well taken care of.
• The staff made a very trying time much easier.

Cons

• The staff treated patients horribly, mocking them and stealing their belongings.
• Male staff tried to barge in while female patients were bathing.
• They spoke poorly of patients who had passed away in front of current patients.
• What the reviewer witnessed was beyond words.
• The facility does not take care of its patients and, in fact, harms them.
• When authorities were contacted, complaints were quickly dismissed, with blame placed on patients for having Alzheimer's or dementia.
• It was not very nice, looking like a grade C restaurant, and it felt like a warehouse.
• They treated the patients like babies and did not care what they wore.

Review

New Friends Memory and Residential Care of Florence is best suited for families seeking a small, intimate memory‑care setting where residents can experience a home‑like atmosphere and receive highly personalized attention. It can work well for loved ones who benefit from quieter surroundings, more hands‑on caregiver time, and a campus feel with studio‑style rooms and well‑kept grounds. This community appeals to those who value a personal touch in daily care and want to stay close to Florence, Oregon. However, it is important to acknowledge that the reviews also flag serious concerns, so families needing a consistently high bar for safety, dignity, and professional conduct may want to evaluate alternatives more rigorously.

On the positive side, several families attest to strong, compassionate care from certain staff members and to a process that can feel smooth when transitions happen well. Specific praise highlights staff members who are “friendly and attentive,” with one family describing a transfer from out of state as seamless because caregivers managed the move with care. Rooms are described as apartment‑style, giving residents a sense of autonomy rather than an institutional feel, and the grounds are noted to be well maintained. In these favorable accounts, the caregiver team is portrayed as responsive and supportive, and families report that the facility can deliver a high level of individual attention when the population is smaller and the staff isn’t overstretched.

Yet the cons cited by multiple reviewers are not small. There are repeated and serious allegations about mistreatment, including verbal disrespect, theft of belongings, and privacy intrusions during routines like bathing. Some reviewers report male staff entering rooms uninvited at sensitive times, and there are troubling claims that staff speak ill of residents who have died, undermining trust in the care environment. Licensing complaints surface in the record, with families urged to review official filings. A common thread among some critiques is a perception that, while the facility manages to keep things clean and in order, the care culture can feel inconsistent, with episodes of overmedication or paternalistic treatment described by former residents’ families. Finally, several residents and families describe the setting as lacking in warmth and decor, likening it to a warehouse or a “grade C restaurant” in atmosphere, where residents are treated like infants rather than as individuals.

This juxtaposition matters: the ability to deliver individualized attention and a home‑like room experience can offset some concerns when the setting is quiet and staff have bandwidth to focus on each resident. However, the most troubling reviews center on behavior that undermines safety, dignity, and trust. For families prioritizing a secure culture with robust, consistently respectful interactions, the potential risk factors cannot be dismissed. Prospective residents should independently verify governance and incident‑response practices, study the licensing history, and probe how complaints are handled and resolved. The presence of highly positive caregiving in some encounters does not automatically absolve reports of mistreatment or systemic gaps in oversight.

To navigate a thoughtful decision, focus on concrete steps before choosing: tour the memory‑care area, observe interactions between staff and residents, and request a candid discussion with front‑line caregivers about daily routines, medication management, and incident reporting. Ask to review the latest licensing inspection summary and any corrective action plans, and talk with current families about ongoing communication and crisis handling. Demand a detailed picture of staffing levels at different shifts, and request references from several families with residents in comparable care levels. If red flags persist or if the explanations from staff feel evasive, it is prudent to compare with other licensed options in Florence or nearby communities that offer stronger, more consistent safety and respect standards.

The bottom line is practical and decisive: New Friends can be a viable choice for families who prioritize a small, personal care environment and are willing to perform careful due diligence to confirm that a consistently respectful, safe care culture is in place. When concerns about staff conduct, dignity, and medical oversight arise, alternatives should be seriously considered. The decision hinges on balancing the appeal of an intimate setting against the imperative of a trustworthy, well‑supervised care environment that protects residents’ autonomy and belongings without compromising their safety.