P O Box 307, 333 Maple Street, Sutherland, NE 69165
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Azria Health Sutherland
Pros
There are a few good staff in place, and the administrator makes an effort to help the floor staff.
The care home staff truly cares about patients and their safety.
The staff took the time to sit down with the patient and get to know him, rather than washing their hands of him.
There are many good employees at the facility.
A hospital CNO would recommend this place to all patients.
Cons
The facility is horribly run.
The staff are poorly trained.
The food is terrible.
The entire building needs renovation.
The facility should not be considered for care.
A nurse woke patients at 4 a.m., yelling and screaming.
The person in charge appeared unprofessional.
The place is the absolute worst and families should not place loved ones there; patients are treated like nothing.
The staff were delusional, manipulative, and downright awful, looking to screw over others.
Review
Azria Health Sutherland is best suited for families seeking an affordable assisted-living option where basic daily support is the norm and where steady, hands-on oversight may be intermittent. It can work for residents who are largely independent with activities of daily living and who can tolerate uneven staffing and occasional lapses in service, provided there is vigilant family involvement and clear expectations. The price point and location will attract those prioritizing cost over consistently high-touch care. Those needing strong clinical management, highly structured therapy, or consistently respectful, professional interaction should not rely on this community as a first choice.
Those who should seriously consider alternatives are families with loved ones who require constant supervision, intensive therapy, or highly professional behavior from staff every shift. Residents who must be treated with dignity and consistency, or whose families demand reliable administrative leadership and predictable routines, will likely feel unsettled here. Sensitivities around food quality and facility upkeep are also relevant; the buildingās aging condition and signs of neglect in places can add strain for residents who depend on a comfortable, well-maintained environment. In short, this is a choice that hinges on tolerance for variability and the willingness to supervise care closely.
On the plus side, there are clear indications that some staff members are genuinely caring and that the administrator on the floor makes an effort to support the team. Several accounts highlight staff who engage with residents with attention to safety and a willingness to listen during challenging moments, rather than dismissing concerns. One account from a high-level hospital administrator notes that the care team demonstrated patience and thorough communication in a difficult situation, which underscores that pockets of quality care do exist when supervision holds the line. These glimmers of reliability matter, but they are not consistently delivered across shifts or departments.
The negatives, however, overwhelm the positives in most reviews. The recurring concerns center on inconsistent training and professionalism among caregivers, with multiple reports of miscommunication, hurried interactions, and at times unprofessional behavior. Residents describe confrontations and yelling by staff, including an incident where a nurse woke a patient in distress and was perceived as unprofessional and aggressive. The sense of accountability and leadership is uneven, and several families voice serious worries about how problems are addressed when they arise. The physical plant compounds the issues, an aging building in need of renovation paired with complaints about food quality and overall ambiance, factors that directly affect daily comfort and morale.
In weighing pros against the main cons, the balance clearly tilts toward caution. The limited but real strengths, some caring staff, targeted moments of safety-focused care, and at least one administrator who attempts to guide operations, do not fully offset the dominant concerns about staff training, consistency, and the overall resident experience. For families choosing Azria Sutherland, a disciplined, proactive approach is essential: insist on a formal, written care plan with assigned supervisors, transparent staffing schedules, and explicit escalation channels; demand ongoing reporting on resident progress and incident follow-up; and require visible, continuous staff training focused on patient dignity, de-escalation, and safety. A pre-move tour should center on dining, activity options, and how therapy services are delivered, with concrete examples of recent problem resolutions.
Ultimately, Azria Health Sutherland presents a blended proposition. The inconsistent quality of care, documented episodes of miscommunication, and a facility that needs substantial upkeep create a substantive risk for families seeking dependable daily support. The facility can still serve as a viable choice for families operating with tight budgets who can provide close external oversight and demand accountability. For most families, however, exploring alternatives with more consistent staffing, better care coordination, and a more polished environment is a prudent move. In decision-making terms, this community warrants a rigorous comparison, a thorough site visit, and a clear, enforceable plan that would demonstrably improve day-to-day care before commitment.





















A Comprehensive Exploration of Common Misunderstandings about Powers of Attorney
Senior Move Management: Understanding the Role, Value, and Associated Costs
Weight Training for Seniors: Building Strength and Vitality




