Salter Woburn Nursing Center

Pros

• The business office helped answer finance questions.
• Her mother-in-law received exceptional and compassionate care at the facility.
• She was able to attend activities and receive physical therapy, and was treated with kindness and dignity.
• Salters were praised for taking care of residents and described as the most compassionate people.
• The staff were caring and professional, and the physical therapists were excellent and worked well with the patients.
• The building was beautiful with lovely, welcoming, and knowledgeable staff.
• The assistant director of nursing was described as wonderful.

Cons

• The facility is described as a very depressing place with months of neglect and staff not checking on residents unless contacted.
• It is alleged that the staff prioritize money and shifts over patient care due to chronic understaffing.
• A relative's diabetes worsened to a blood sugar of 500 because the facility allegedly does not follow proper dietary needs.
• The center is criticized as a for-profit operation rather than a true rehabilitation facility.
• Staff are accused of being rude, unresponsive, and not attentive, with call buttons often left unanswered.
• There are accounts of abuse and neglect leading to dehydration and malnutrition, from which the patient did not recover.
• Family members report delays in notifying loved ones of a relative's death, sometimes taking hours or days.
• Some reviews urge others not to send loved ones there, or to "run away" from the facility.
• Personal belongings of deceased residents were found missing after discharge.
• A long-term resident experienced decline due to neglect, including loss of ability to use a walker and bedsores.

Review

The experiences shared about this facility tell a story that runs from heartwarming gratitude to stark, cautionary warnings. For every note of praise there is a corresponding concern, and together they paint a complex picture of care that can feel incredibly personal - yet sometimes alarmingly inconsistent. Families describe moments of exceptional compassion and meaningful engagement, but they also recount persistent issues around staffing, communication, safety, and treatment that can leave loved ones and their allies feeling uncertain, frustrated, and even frightened.

On the positive side, several families speak with real warmth about the care their relatives received. One reviewer recalls that their mother-in-law was given exceptional and compassionate care, with opportunities to participate in activities and receive physical therapy. They emphasize that, until the end of her days, she was treated with kindness and dignity, which made a painful time a little more bearable. There are also stories of staff going above and beyond in specific roles: certain nurses, aides, and therapists are described as patient, professional, and capable, with references to excellent physical therapy, attentive aides, and a bright, welcoming environment. A few individuals even name particular staff members who made a difference during their recovery, such as Celoni, Emmanuell, Yunuso, Marie, Miriam, Rosfelyn, Joann, Joe, Carmen, and others, suggesting that for some residents and their families, a good day could hinge on a single attentive team member. One reviewer, speaking as a vendor, notes a positive experience working with the staff, underscoring that the facility can feel well-run and approachable in certain contexts. There are also praise-filled comments about the building's appearance and the presence of courteous, knowledgeable staff, with some families expressing gratitude for the daily care their loved ones received and for the support of the facility's administrators and nurses.

Yet the thread of praise is consistently interwoven with warnings and painful memories. Several reviews describe a sense of being overwhelmed by understaffing and understaffed shifts, with caregivers who seem rushed or disengaged. Some families report that call buttons were ignored for extended periods, sometimes with life-threatening consequences or near-misses, and they recount situations where essential medical needs were not addressed promptly. One account describes a diabetic patient whose blood sugar spiked to 500, attributed to dietary issues, raising concerns about whether the kitchen understood or respected critical dietary restrictions. Another speaks to a broader fear: that some facilities can become more focused on turnover and occupancy than on patient well-being, with phrases like "for profit grift" echoing a perception that financial incentives eclipsed patient-centered care.

The most troubling utterances center on neglect, abuse, and medical mismanagement. Several reviewers recount frightening episodes: a patient allegedly abused by a staff member on the first day, a case of prolonged neglect leading to severe dehydration and malnutrition, and broader claims of insufficient monitoring and delayed response to emergencies. There are stories of missed or delayed calls for help, failures to adjust medications for depression, and frequent complaints about the quality of daily care. One family member recounts a heartbreaking delay in notifying relatives of a loved one's death, noting that it took hours to disseminate the news and that the administrator's outreach was slow, which compounded a painful loss with a sense of bureaucratic insensitivity. Some reviews describe controlled, depersonalized care where staff appeared "checked out," while others remember moments of genuine kindness that stood in stark contrast to those memories.

Dietary and medical management are recurring bones of contention. In several accounts, families question the adequacy of nutrition and medical oversight, especially for residents with chronic conditions such as Parkinson's or diabetes. The impression given by some reviewers is that dietary protocols were not followed with the seriousness their loved ones required, that pain management and mood disorders were not adequately addressed, and that the overall approach sometimes did not align with best-practice standards. The disparity between narratives - where a few patients thrive under the care of some therapists and nurses, and others deteriorate due to systemic gaps - creates a troubling uncertainty for families who must decide where to place someone they love.

The facility's public face - its reputation as a "beautiful building" with "lovely staff" - collides with the harsher, more administrative realities described by many families. Some reviewers acknowledge excellence in orthopedic and physical therapy programs, effective communication within certain care teams, and an atmosphere that feels safe and clean. Others cite experiences that undermine trust: claims of laziness, poor communication, missed alerts, or a sense that the institution prioritizes financial concerns over patient welfare. There are also comments about leaving a loved one in a facility that feels depressing or unsafe, about rooms being empty of attention, and about the distress of watching a caregiver pattern that shifts responsibility rather than actively addressing the resident's needs.

Taken together, these reviews depict a facility capable of wonderful, person-centered moments and, simultaneously, a place where families fear for the basic safety and dignity of their loved ones. The most important takeaway is that care quality appears highly variable, hinging on who is on shift, how the administration prioritizes staffing and training, and how thoroughly concerns are managed and escalated. For families evaluating this center, the message is clear: seek out direct, recent feedback from current residents and families, visit multiple times at different hours, ask pointed questions about staffing levels, call-response times, dietary protocols, and emergency responsiveness, and consider how the facility's practices align with the level and kind of care your loved one requires. The stories remind us that compassionate, individualized care is possible, but it is not guaranteed, and vigilance - across every shift and department - remains essential to safeguarding those we entrust to care.

Restaurants

• The Brickyard (0.6 miles)
• McDonald's (1.8 miles)
• Chipotle Mexican Grill (2 miles)
• The Cheesecake Factory (3.3 miles)
• Shake Shack (3.3 miles)
• Burger King (3.4 miles)
• sweetgreen (3.4 miles)

Pharmacies

• CVS Pharmacy (1.4 miles)
• CVS Speciality (2.2 miles)
• Walgreens (2.5 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (3.2 miles)
• Wegmans (3.9 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (4.2 miles)
• Walgreens (4.8 miles)

Physicians

• Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates (1.9 miles)
• Lahey Clinic Ophthalmology (2.7 miles)
• Laser Gentle Medical Spa (3.6 miles)
• North Suburban Orthopedic Associates (4.9 miles)
• Fresenius Medical Care (5.4 miles)
• Lahey Lexington (6.2 miles)
• Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates (6.4 miles)

Parks

• Mary Cummings Park (2.6 miles)
• Sheepfold, Middlesex Fells Reservation (3.3 miles)
• Middlesex Fells Reservation (4 miles)
• Rindge Park (4.5 miles)
• Melrose Common (5.4 miles)
• John M. Devir Park (5.8 miles)
• Tufts Park (6.4 miles)

Hospitals

• Lahey Clinic (2.8 miles)
• McLean Hospital (6.9 miles)
• Mount Auburn Hospital (7.9 miles)

Cafes

• Pressed Cafe (3.1 miles)
• Starbucks (3.6 miles)
• Starbucks (7.2 miles)
• Cafe Rustica (7.3 miles)
• Forge Baking Company (7.5 miles)
• Perfecto's Caffe (7.6 miles)
• Flour Bakery + Cafe (8.1 miles)

Theaters

• AMC Burlington Cinema 1 (3.5 miles)
• AMC Assembly Row 12 (7.4 miles)

Transportation

• Ballardvale Mbta Station (4.2 miles)
• MBTA Davis Square Station (6.5 miles)
• Wellington Station (7 miles)
• Porter Square MBTA Station (7.1 miles)
• Hanscom Field (BED) (7.4 miles)
• Assembly Station (7.6 miles)

Places of Worship

• St Agnes Parish-Arlington (5 miles)
• Our Lady's Church (6.8 miles)