345 Garfield St, McMinnville, TN 37110
To contact a resident: (931) 473-4760
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
McMinnville Boarding Home for the Elderly Costs & Pricing
McMinnville Boarding Home for the Elderly offers competitive pricing for its residents when compared to both Warren County and the broader Tennessee region. The facility provides semi-private rooms at $2,000 per month, significantly lower than the county's average of $3,360 and the state average of $3,162. For those seeking more privacy, studio apartments are available at a monthly rate of $2,500, which also stands favorably against the local average of $3,100 and state average of $3,485. This makes McMinnville Boarding Home not only an attractive option for elderly care but also a financially prudent choice for families looking to provide quality accommodation without overextending their budgets.
| Floor plans | McMinnville Boarding Home for the Elderly | Warren County | Tennessee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Semi-Private | $2,000 | $3,360 | $3,162 |
| Studio | $2,500 | $3,100 | $3,485 |
Assisted Living communities with a similar price nearby
-
from -$150 / mo
27 Bailey Manor
$1,850 to $2,000 / month20.7 miles away
Overall Review of McMinnville Boarding Home for the Elderly
Pros
The facility was clean.- The staff were nice.
- She seems happy and helps the other patients.
- It is the best for her situation.
- The lunches smelled and looked really good.
- She seems to be well cared for.
Cons
The facility has some not-so-good workers, which undermines overall care.- Pam is described as hateful or burnt out, and she makes residents miserable.
- Residents feel they are talked about, and staff reportedly tell them they wonât show up or lie about visiting.
- There is a staff member accused of stealing prescription narcotics and lacks proper prescriptions.
- There arenât many activities, possibly due to limited space.
- Ongoing in-house employee issues are suggested to prevent the facility from earning decent reviews.
Review
McMinnville Boarding Home for the Elderly is best suited for seniors who need light custodial support in a small, home-like setting and for families willing to accept limited space in exchange for clean environs, dependable meals, and some genuinely caring staff. The reviews consistently note cleanliness, approachable meals, and positive moments with particular caregivers. Rooms are modest, two to a room, and programming is restrained by the footprint, but the environment can feel straightforward and manageable for residents who do not require intensive medical oversight. For families located within a reasonable drive who can visit periodically, this community offers a practical, low-fruss alternative to a more clinical setting.
Those who should consider alternatives are families prioritizing steady staffing, robust activity calendars, private rooms, and stringent safety controls. The care experience appears uneven: one reviewer highlights a mix of competent and less-effective workers, implying inconsistent daily support. A separate report cites serious concerns about medication handling, suggesting governance gaps that could affect safety and trust. Distance compounds these issues, making regular oversight harder and turning reliance on staff impressions into a riskier proposition for families who cannot frequent the facility.
The main strengths, cleanliness, reasonable meals, and some staff warmth, do offset several drawbacks for residents who value reliability in routine tasks over a bustling social calendar. Clean facilities and meals that look and smell appealing can make daily life comfortable, especially for residents who thrive on predictable routines. When a patient connects with a dependable caregiver or two, that relationship can anchor the day and provide the human connection that helps mitigate the smaller limitations, such as limited activities and tight room configurations.
Yet the drawbacks linger and slice into overall satisfaction. Small, two-person rooms limit privacy and can feel crowded, especially for residents who crave personal space or for families hoping for a more expansive living arrangement. Activity options appear limited, potentially leaving more active or socially inclined residents under-stimulated. The reported perception that residents are âtalked aboutâ or otherwise not fully respected at times signals a culture that families must scrutinize, because respectful, transparent communication is essential in any elder-care setting. And while allegations of medication mismanagement are grave, they demand rigorous verification and insistence on strong internal controls if the facility is to be trusted with ongoing oversight.
Still, there is value in a candid assessment: the community delivers the basics well enough for a subset of families and residents. For those who can tolerate variability in staffing and who place high importance on clean surroundings and consistent meals, the positives can outpace the negatives when paired with careful, proactive oversight from family members during visits. Prospective residents should demand a current, clear picture of staffing stability, request an up-to-date activity schedule, and probe the facilityâs medication-management processes and incident-tracking records. A firsthand tour during different times of the day will illuminate how well the team handles stress and whether core staff maintain constructive, respectful relationships with residents.
In practical terms, this community is a reasonable option for seniors who want a straightforward, affordable setting where cleanliness and meals are dependable and where a handful of caregivers can deliver meaningful, if limited, moments of connection. It is less suitable for families requiring private rooms, a rich activity program, or ironclad safeguards against staffing gaps and medication issues. For those with higher care needs or who demand more consistent governance, exploration of alternatives, smaller, more intimate homes with steadier staff or larger facilities with stronger oversight, should be a priority. The decision should hinge on proximity, the value placed on daily routines, and the familyâs confidence in the leadership to stabilize staffing and safeguard resident well-being.
33 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Activities on-site
Beauty salon
Cable or satellite TV
Devotional services off-site
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Indoor common areas
Kitchenette
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
24-hour call system
Ambulatory care
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Diabetic care
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Mental wellness program
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
Choosing the Right Senior Care: A Detailed Exploration of Assisted Living and Nursing Homes
Understanding the True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025: A Comprehensive Guide
Understanding Medicaid Coverage for Assisted Living: A Comprehensive Guide