5221 Highway 215, Pauline, SC 29374
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Rosewood Assisted Living
Cons
The reviewer would not recommend the facility for a loved one.- There was a strong odor of urine upon entering the facility.
- The aunt's nasal cannula was on the floor, and staff claimed the piece connecting the hoses was lost.
- A phone call was received 24 hours later stating she had died because she kept removing her oxygen.
- The facility left two residents stranded at a closed location and would not answer the phone.
- The staff were described as cussing at patients and not caring for them.
Review
Rosewood Assisted Living in Pauline, SC is not a broad fit for most families seeking dependable care. The community appears best suited for absolutely independent seniors who require minimal daily assistance and whose families can stay vigilant and intervene quickly if concerns arise. In practice, that narrow niche means Rosewood serves only those who can tolerate an environment where medical oversight is sporadic, staff responsiveness is questionable, and daily quality of care is not reliably demonstrated.
For families evaluating options, Rosewood should be considered only after all safer, more transparent alternatives have been explored. Those with loved ones who have chronic health needs, such as COPD, oxygen dependence, or conditions that demand constant monitoring, should look elsewhere. Families relying on consistent, respectful staffing, clean surroundings, and prompt attention to distress signals will want to pass on Rosewood and prioritize facilities with verifiable, positive care experiences and stronger safety nets.
What little positive nuance exists in the available feedback barely offsets the overwhelming concerns. The reviews do not present clear, credible advantages that would compensate for the primary drawbacks. When a facility is judged by residents and families primarily on elements like smell, supervision, and staff demeanor, any so-called advantages tend to fade. In Rosewood’s case, the absence of substantiated strengths makes the risks stand out: a care setting must earn trust through reliable, empathetic, and proactive care, not through the absence of egregious failures alone.
The most troubling, recurring issues center on supervision, medical safety, and respect. A loved one reportedly died after an oxygen-management lapse, with the family receiving a late notification and questions about why monitoring surpassed prescribed needs. Multiple accounts describe a facility where a nasal cannula was left on the floor, and where residents were inadequately checked or supported. There are also claims that staff did not answer calls from nearby facilities during emergencies and that patients were subjected to dismissive or abrasive treatment. Together, these episodes suggest a pattern rather than isolated incidents, pointing to systemic shortcomings in staffing, training, and accountability.
Two other persistent red flags reinforce the decision to steer families toward alternatives: inadequate maintenance of basic sanitary conditions and a troubling culture in interactions with residents. Smell and cleanliness concerns, coupled with reports of staff cursing at patients, paint a picture of an environment where dignity and comfort are not consistently safeguarded. When care hinges on the competence and tone of the on-site team, these concerns transform from mere complaints into meaningful risk factors, risk of hospitalizations, escalation of medical issues, and erosion of resident well-being. In short, the cons do not merely outweigh the pros; they cast doubt on the facility’s ability to provide the fundamental protections expected in assisted living.
For families weighing next steps, a disciplined, practical approach is essential. Schedule unannounced visits to observe staff interactions and response times; request to review current care plans and medication management procedures; verify staffing ratios during peak hours; and probe how oxygen-dependent residents are monitored and supported. Seek out independent feedback from current residents and families, and examine state inspection histories for safety and compliance records. In the absence of transparent, credible evidence of improvement, Rosewood should remain a last-resort option rather than a first-choice community.
The bottom line is decisive. Rosewood Assisted Living is a high-risk option for anyone with real medical needs or a wish for consistently compassionate, competent care. The strongest takeaway is to pursue other communities that demonstrate reliable oversight, clean environments, respectful staff conduct, and clear, timely communication with families. For those with no practical alternatives, proceed with rigorous, ongoing oversight and explicit expectations documented in a formal care plan. In all other cases, move toward facilities where safety, dignity, and dependable care are proven priorities.
67 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Memory Care
Activities on-site
Air-conditioning
Beauty salon
Cable or satellite TV
Computer center
Devotional services off-site
Dining room
Fitness room
Fully furnished
Gaming room
Garden
Housekeeping services
Indoor common areas
Kitchenette
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Private bathrooms
Restaurant-style dining
Small library
Telephone
Wellness center
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
Greenville-Spartanburg (21 miles away)
Community operated transportation
12-16 hour nursing
24-hour call system
Ambulatory care
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Diabetic care
Medication management
Mental wellness program
Special dietary restrictions
Concierge services
Planned day trips
Extensive on-site amenities with 24/7 care.
Comprehending Evening Confusion in Dementia: Causes, Manifestations, and Support
Delirium and Dementia: Unraveling the Key Differences
Are Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease Lethal? A Comprehensive Exploration