133 West Clarke Road, Florence, SC 29501
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Carlyle Senior Care Of Florence
Pros
The new unit managers are very attentive.
The DON and ADON seem to really care about patients and their care.
Amy is always communicating about the care plan meetings.
The new social worker truly cares about the residents.
The staff and caregivers take great care of residents and genuinely love them.
The staff are a special group of people who will forever be like family to the residents.
The facility is excellent.
Cons
The facility was not qualified to meet his care needs.
The staff wanted him removed from the facility.
Relocating him by Uber was cruel and showed a lack of understanding of his Alzheimerās and sundowning.
He should have been treated with more respect by the facility.
The building needs cleaning and upgrading, including the parking lot and exterior.
Some nurses donāt seem to care about their duties, and call lights go unanswered for long periods.
There are roaches, and patient belongings are reported as stolen.
Patient bathrooms were very dirty, with patients unclean and fecal matter under nails.
The facility is terrible and does not care for or monitor its patients.
The staff are negligent at best, and there is no communication.
The social services department failed to communicate and transferred a resident to another facility without follow-up.
The facility needs many repairs and the building is falling apart.
There are safety concerns, with questions about how the doors stay open.
The place smelled of urine and was dirty upon first impression.
Review
Carlyle Senior Care of Florence is best suited for families that value hands-on, relationship-driven care and are prepared to tolerate a facility where leadership turnover has previously disrupted operations but where recent management changes promise more attentive oversight. In practice, this community can deliver strong, personalized attention for residents who require consistent wound care, close daily monitoring, and steady communication from care teams. The strongest argument for selection lies in the degree to which the new DON, ADON, and unit managers appear to prioritize residentsā care plans and direct involvement from a social worker. It is not pitched as a pristine, model environment; it is pitched as a place where care can be stabilized if leadership remains engaged.
However, this is not the option for households with nonnegotiable cleanliness and safety standards. Families that expect an odor-free environment, spotless rooms, and highly reliable response to call bells should look elsewhere. The history includes persistent cleanliness problems, odors, and even roach sightings, plus reports of belongings being stolen and inconsistent housekeeping. For residents with high dementia risk or behaviors requiring tight supervision, the inconsistency in environmental upkeep and communication can compound risk. In short, alternatives with stronger environmental control, steadier staffing, and fewer negative maintenance concerns should be considered first when those factors matter most to quality of life and safety.
On the upside, several reviews note real improvements following management changes: unit managers who are attentive, a DON and ADON who seem to care, and a social worker who genuinely focuses on residents. Wound care, in particular, is identified as a bright spot when staff stay engaged with daily plans and regular updates. Family comments underscore that staff can be devoted and that care plans are being followed more consistently. In practice, these positives translate into meaningful daily experiences for residents who require hands-on attention and clear, frequent communication about treatment decisions. When the leadership remains stable, these threads of care are more likely to hold.
Yet the downsides are stubborn and serious. The facility continues to struggle with cleanliness and odor in many areas. Reports describe dirty bathrooms, fecal matter under nails, and general neglect in housekeeping. Instances of roaches and stolen belongings contribute to a pervasive sense of insecurity. Long call-light response times, limited staff availability, and perceived gaps in day-to-day nursing care undermine residentsā comfort and safety. Communication gaps persist in social services, with families reporting transfers without timely updates. The physical plant shows wear, and some reviewers call for more repairs and better front-lot maintenance; these conditions erode trust and can complicate risk management.
Pros can offset cons only to a degree. When a resident needs wound care and highly personalized attention, the engaged leadership and care team can deliver the consistency that matters most for medical stability. Clear care-plan communication and a responsive social worker reduce family anxiety and support better decision making. However, environmental shortcomings, inconsistent housekeeping, and safety concerns dampen the overall experience and may offset the clinical benefits for many families. In other words, success hinges on sustained leadership stability and a credible, ongoing commitment to environmental renewal and rigorous infection control.
For families seriously evaluating Carlyle, the next step is a disciplined on-site assessment. Request to meet the DON and ADON, review a recent state inspection, and observe a shift from multiple angles: nursing, housekeeping, and administration. Probe call-light response times, housekeeping schedules, and incident logs for theft or misplacement. Inspect cleanliness upon entry, test odors in patient rooms, and note the status of repairs and the parking lot. If assurances and visible improvements hold under scrutiny, Carlyle can be a workable choice for those who prize engaged caregiving; if not, alternatives with stronger environmental standards and tighter operational controls will serve better in the long run.



















California's Form 602A: An In-Depth Examination of Senior Care Assessment
Comprehensive Look at Senior Blood Pressure Charts: Normal and Elevated Levels by Age
Top Canine Companions for Older Adults