1717 Southern Ridge Trl, Madison, WI 53719
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Advanced Family Home Costs & Pricing
At Advanced Family Home, the monthly cost for a one-bedroom unit is set at $3,600. This fee positions it as a more affordable option compared to the average cost in Dane County, which stands at $4,101, although it is slightly higher than the statewide average of $3,412 in Wisconsin. By offering a competitive rate within the local market, Advanced Family Home provides residents with a comfortable and economical choice for their housing needs. This pricing strategy not only reflects our commitment to quality care and accommodation but also underscores our aim to be accessible to families seeking supportive living environments.
| Floor plans | Advanced Family Home | Dane County | Wisconsin |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Bedroom | $3,600 | $4,101 | $3,412 |
Overall Review of Advanced Family Home
Pros
The home is described as a good fit for an elderly person who just needs help with day-to-day living.
The owner and staff are described as being qualified in dementia care.
They offered a very personalized approach to the care their friend would receive.
Cons
The facility is described as a horrible place and a nightmare.
It is not suitable for residents suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's disease.
The owner and staff claimed dementia-care qualifications, but their credibility is clearly questionable.
The facility threatened to remove a resident and warned of police involvement.
The owner sued a family member for breach of contract and was found to be lacking credibility by the judge.
The reviewer labels the home unscrupulous and warns others to avoid it.
Review
Advanced Family Home in Madison, WI is best suited for an elderly resident who primarily needs help with daily living activities and does not require dementia or memory-care support. Families should not rely on this community for loved ones who are living with Alzheimer’s or significant cognitive impairment. The strongest signal here is that the home may host a straightforward, low-demand level of assistance, but it is not a reliable option for memory-care needs.
Those considering alternatives should direct attention to facilities with explicit dementia-care credentials, trained staff, and consistent governance. The reviews present a red flag for anyone evaluating memory-care services: a pattern of misalignment between claimed capabilities and actual care, coupled with aggressive, legally fraught interactions with families. If a loved one requires structured, specialized dementia programming, closer inspection of other options is essential. For families seeking predictable billing, transparent communications, and professional dispute resolution, look elsewhere.
The potential upside, where it exists, appears to hinge on a highly personalized approach to daily living support. A reviewer notes that the home’s claimed attention to individual routines could be suitable for someone who just needs help with everyday tasks. Yet this supposed strength is overwhelmed by the lack of dementia readiness and the discomfort surrounding ownership and management. In practice, the personal touch cannot compensate for care mismatches, and it does not resolve the fundamental risk that cognitive-limited residents may be placed in an unsafe or poorly managed environment.
The major cons manifest as serious operational and ethical concerns. An urgent removal request delivered late at night, with threats of police involvement, suggests fragile crisis management and strained family communication. A subsequent court action over breach of contract compounds the risk, signaling a pattern that families should not overlook. A judge’s determination that the owner lacked credibility reinforces the impression of governance problems and unreliability at critical moments when families are counting on steadiness and lawful conduct. The combination of abrupt moves, legal threats, and contested finances creates a high-stakes risk environment for vulnerable residents.
Practical due diligence becomes non-negotiable before choosing this community. Prospective families should insist on clear, verifiable licensing status, documented dementia-care qualifications (if there is any memory impairment in the household), and a written care plan with measurable goals. Ask for names and credentials of direct-care staff, the facility’s protocol for crises, and a track record of complaint resolution. Request references from current residents and families, and verify through state regulatory records. Attend multiple visits, interview staff beyond the owner, and request a trial period or placement review to observe daily operations under real conditions.
Bottom line: this community may serve a narrowly defined niche, elderly residents needing basic daily living support without cognitive impairment, but the documented history raises substantial concern for families with memory-care needs or for those seeking reliable, legally sound governance. If dementia care is on the table, alternatives that specialize in memory support are strongly advised. Even for straightforward assistance, the safety, consistency, and credibility questions here warrant serious caution, and compelling reasons to explore other options before committing.






8 Key Indicators That Suggest It May Be Time to Transition from Assisted Living to Skilled Nursing Care
Nourishing the Mind: Essential Dietary Approaches for Dementia
Understanding Dementia Behaviors: Practical Insights and Strategies for Caregivers