Caring for patients takes a backseat to profit - Certified Medical Assistant (CMA) SaVida Health Employee Review

2.0
3 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Started out as a wonderful place but quickly turned to a “ money more important than patients and employees.

Cons

Same as above. Patient care turned to money in more important, too many patients, not enough time and employees are not treated well.

Explore other reviews about SaVida Health

5.0
24 Jan 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Savida Health is all about patients care and overall helping people overcome trials and tribulations in their road to recovery with MAT & Counseling. They are great at what they do for the community. From the Center Supervisor- Medical Assistants down to the RNs and PA' s & LDACs. Everyone truly Cares,Worcester Site being highly recommended.

Cons

Nothing bad to say but they need a bigger location as they are expanding and the patient intake is consistently growing rapidly.

1.0
13 Apr 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

- Mission-driven work in addiction medicine - Opportunity to serve a high-need population

Cons

I worked as a provider in a Maine location and found the role to be operationally unsustainable. There was no protected administrative time, yet providers were expected to manage full patient loads, admissions, and complex clinical care. Documentation and follow-up routinely extended beyond clinical hours. Patient scheduling was inconsistent and, at times, unsafe. Some days were significantly underbooked (e.g., only a few patients scheduled), while other days involved excessive volume without additional support. This level of variability reflects a lack of effective operational oversight. The "oversight" that was on-site was reckless, inexperienced and immature. The variability in scheduling and lack of support created conditions that did not consistently align with safe, high-quality patient care. There is a VERY high provider turnover, contributing to ongoing instability and increased workload for remaining staff. Communication pathways were deliberately tightly controlled in a way that limited direct collaboration between providers and support staff, introducing unnecessary friction into routine clinical care. At the same time, workflows were frequently changed without meaningful input from clinicians. Concerns related to workload, safety, and operations were raised but not meaningfully addressed. I ultimately left because the structure did not support safe or sustainable clinical practice.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All