Broe Reviews

My experience at BROE was that high performance is often rewarded with more work, not more support, recognition, or compensation. Roles and responsibilities regularly expanded far beyond original job descriptions. When someone left, was terminated, or was pushed out, those responsibilities were often absorbed by the remaining on-site team rather than the role being backfilled. What was framed as temporary coverage often became permanent redistribution of work. The added workload frequently came without any meaningful adjustment to compensation, title, resources, or staffing support. This created an unsustainable environment and contributed heavily to burnout. In my own role, I took on responsibilities well beyond what would traditionally fall under an assistant manager position while supporting operations across multiple communities. I consistently stepped in where there were operational gaps because the work needed to be done. Despite that, support and compensation did not reflect the expanded scope of the role. I also observed what felt like a strong emphasis on reducing labor costs, often at the expense of operational support and employee retention. In my experience, major roles were left unfilled while the workload remained, with responsibilities redistributed to employees already carrying full workloads. In some cases, positions appeared to be reposted at lower compensation following turnover. From my perspective, this created significant strain on teams and contributed to a broader feeling that cutting costs was often prioritized over long-term operational sustainability, training, and retaining experienced employees. Another major challenge was the lack of meaningful support and training. In my experience, asking for help, clarification, or additional training often led to delayed responses, no response at all, or meetings being scheduled that either did not happen or did not result in meaningful follow-through. Employees were expected to perform at a high level while often being left to figure things out on their own, even when actively asking for guidance. Expectations were high, but support often felt inconsistent or unavailable. One of the most difficult parts of my experience was the culture around raising concerns. I raised concerns to HR regarding practices I personally believed were unethical and, in some cases, potentially inconsistent with policy or legal requirements. After doing so, I felt there was a noticeable shift in how I was viewed internally. My personal experience was that raising concerns was not welcomed when those concerns challenged existing processes or leadership decisions. During my termination, I was told that I had “gone above and beyond,” which made the decision especially difficult to understand. There had been no written warnings, no performance improvement plan, and no meaningful coaching process leading up to it. From my perspective, the decision felt inconsistent with the feedback I had received regarding my work and contributions. I also left with concerns regarding transparency and consistency around internal policies and performance management. In my own experience, expectations and policies sometimes felt unclear, inconsistently communicated, or difficult to verify. During my termination, some of the reasoning referenced did not align with policies I had previously been trained on or had access to. When I asked for clarification or documentation regarding certain expectations, I did not feel clear answers were provided. This contributed to my overall impression that standards were not always clearly communicated or applied consistently. What stood out most was what felt like a significant lack of consistency in accountability. In my experience, I observed conduct that I personally viewed as serious and concerning that appeared to result in little or no meaningful corrective action. At the same time, I was terminated without warning, without progressive discipline, and based on expectations I did not feel had been clearly documented or consistently communicated beforehand. That contrast was difficult to ignore. This created a broader perception of favoritism and selective enforcement depending on the individual involved. In my experience, standards did not always appear to be applied equally across teams or levels of the organization. Accountability often felt inconsistent, which made it difficult to trust that policies and expectations were being enforced fairly or objectively. I also had concerns regarding certain administrative processes involving resident legal matters and documentation. While I cannot speak to company-wide intent, I personally observed situations that made me uncomfortable and raised concerns for me around process, oversight, and the potential impact those decisions could have on residents. Overall, my experience was that BROE expects a tremendous amount from its strongest on-site employees while support, communication, accountability, and recognition do not always match those expectations. In my opinion, employees who keep their heads down, absorb additional work, and do not challenge decisions are often valued. Employees who raise concerns, ask difficult questions, or push for accountability can quickly be viewed differently. Once you are perceived as disruptive to the status quo, it can feel like you become a liability rather than an asset. There are many talented employees doing everything they can to keep these communities running. Unfortunately, in my experience, the broader culture made that difficult to sustain long term. And don’t bother asking for an exit interview, they will tell you that they could accommodate and never schedule or return emails regarding an exit interview.

Clique culture, empty promises. No employee appreciation