Princess Care Home in Everett, WA

Senior living communities with a similar price nearby

• from +$300 / mo

  Gold Standard Care

  5 from 20 reviews

  $2,800 / month

  7.2 miles away
• from +$75 / mo

  Admiral Heights

  5 from 12 reviews

  $2,575 to $2,975 / month

  22.8 miles away
• About the same

  Silver Pond AFH

  5 from 10 reviews

  $2,500 to $3,500 / month

  0.2 miles away
• from -$150 / mo

  Truewood By Merrill, First Hill

  4.5 from 86 reviews

  $2,350 to $5,550 / month

  20.0 miles away
• from -$105 / mo

  Park Place

  4.5 from 66 reviews

  $2,395 to $2,695 / month

  24.7 miles away

Pros

• The AFH cares for residents by providing specialized nail and foot care.
• The residents seem very happy.
• The residents are clean, and they seem to enjoy living there.
• The staff are friendly, caring, and attentive to residents' needs.
• The facility is regarded as the best place for senior adults.
• The owners and care team make everyone feel welcome and part of the family.
• The care team provides amazing care and proactively meets residentsā€™ needs, making them comfortable and at home.
• Health and medical issues are closely monitored and promptly addressed.
• Residents greatly enjoy the social and recreational activities, such as music time, offered throughout the year.

Cons

• Ian Bergdorfer does not know what he is doing at all.
• He is the main owner and can be very rude and intimidating.
• He overdosed the reviewer on their medication, causing them to become sick and vomit.
• He admitted giving both doses in the morning after the reviewer asked for their afternoon meds.
• Emallin is described as crazy and blamed the reviewer for family problems, which stressed them and made them uncomfortable.
• The reviewer does not recommend this place for anyone.

Review

Princess Care Home in Everett is best suited for families seeking a warm, home-like environment where seniors receive highly attentive personal care, regular health monitoring, and opportunities for social engagement within a compact, personable setting. The model serves residents who thrive on close relationships with caregivers and value proactive problem-solving as part of daily life. It appeals to those who do not need hospital-level amenities but do require dependable support with daily activities, mobility assistance, and routine clinical checks. The emphasis on a small-community feel where staff relationships translate into daily well-being makes this community an attractive match for seniors who prioritize dignity, familiarity, and steady, personal attention.

Evidence from multiple reviews underscores strong caregiving warmth and practical benefits. Residents appear happy, clean, and well-cared-for; specialized services like foot care are actually delivered on site, signaling a responsive, team-based approach to health and comfort. The owners and care team are described as welcoming and family-like, fostering a culture of proactive attention to medical concerns and timely problem-solving. Social and recreational programming, such as music time, helps sustain engagement and quality of life. Cleanliness and attentiveness are repeatedly highlighted as hallmarks, and the consistent emphasis on daily satisfaction and belonging alongside routine medical oversight creates a compelling case for families valuing steady, personable care.

However, potential residents should weigh serious governance and safety concerns voiced by one reviewer. Allegations of rude, intimidating leadership, a medication-error incident, and a tense relationship with a family member point to vulnerabilities in oversight and accountability that no family should overlook. Additional reports of an unpleasant odor raise questions about environmental maintenance and comfort. While this is a minority voice amid a chorus of praise, it introduces meaningful red flags about leadership style, staff morale, medication administration, and how complaints are resolved. Families must weigh whether these concerns reflect isolated incidents or indicate capacity gaps that could affect long-term safety and trust.

On balance, the strong pros, compassionate staff, visible daily attention to health, and an engaged social calendar, offset many typical aging-in-place concerns, especially for residents who thrive in small, relational environments. Yet the potential downsides deserve serious attention: medication safety is non-negotiable, odor and sanitation signals matter, and leadership conduct can dramatically shape resident experience and family confidence. If leadership demonstrates transparent protocols, supportive supervision, and robust medication-management practices, the positives can reliably outweigh the risks. Conversely, if governance remains opaque or staff discussions reveal ongoing friction around care decisions, the scale tips toward seeking alternatives with clearer accountability and more formalized safety processes. Prospective residents must test these dimensions during tours and by asking for concrete policy examples.

Practical due diligence helps separate fit from misfit. Families should request a detailed tour focusing on care planning, medication administration, and incident reporting. Inquire about staff-to-resident ratios across shifts, the process for alerting families to health changes, and how specialists, such as foot care professionals, coordinate with regular nursing staff. Review the activity calendar to assess whether social programming aligns with the residentā€™s interests and abilities. Ask to speak with current residents and families about day-to-day routines and any concerns they've encountered, and verify how management addresses complaints. Finally, compare with nearby assisted living options that emphasize transparent governance, consistent staffing, and strong safety records to ensure the chosen setting aligns with long-term expectations and budget.

When positioned against alternatives, Princess Care Home represents a compelling option for seniors who prize warmth, personalized attention, and an active social life in a compact setting. It is less clearly ideal for those whose top priority is ironclad medication safety, unwavering leadership conduct, or a perfectly odor-free environment from day one. Families should weigh the near-unanimous praise for caregiver availability and resident happiness against the notable safety caveats described in a single critical report. If the family can verify robust medication protocols, transparent leadership, and a plan to maintain environmental standards, Princess Care Home can deliver dependable, dignified living with the comfort of a true community feel. Otherwise, exploring alternatives with stronger governance and longer safety track records is prudent.