Overall sentiment across the reviews for Escalante at the Lakes is mixed but leans toward a generally positive view of the facility’s people and core amenities, tempered by repeated concerns about staffing, management communication, and certain lapses in resident-level care. Many reviewers emphasize the warmth and compassion of direct care staff and single out several employees and leaders by name for exceptional dedication. The community’s common areas, grounds and recent renovations receive consistent praise; reviewers frequently describe a clean, well-maintained building with pleasant grounds, accessible indoor walking paths, lakeside seating and several desirable amenities such as a theater room, library, exercise room, billiards and regular live entertainment. For many families the facility’s social atmosphere, wellness programming and range of activities help residents settle in and feel emotionally comfortable.
Dining and included services are recurring strengths for a sizable number of reviews. Multiple reviewers compliment the chef, appreciate meal variety, and note that specialized diets are monitored and meals can be tailored. Several accounts also point to generous inclusions in the monthly rate — housekeeping, linens, medication management, bathing assistance and on-site amenities such as refrigerators and microwaves in rooms — that create convenience and perceived value. In addition, Escalante’s design features (ramps, roll-in showers, uninterrupted indoor walking) and some thoughtful memory-care design elements are cited as positives for residents with limited mobility or cognitive needs.
Despite these strengths, a prominent pattern emerges around staffing and management. Numerous reviewers describe staff turnover, thin staffing (especially overnight and after-hours), and inconsistent follow-through on promised services. These workforce issues are linked by some families to lapses in care: missed or delayed responses to call buttons, medication or pain-management problems, hygiene and housekeeping lapses in individual rooms, and in more severe instances allegations of neglect resulting in hospitalizations or untreated wounds. Several relatives reported specific distressing incidents (e.g., soiled garments left in closets, missing fall-checks, bedsore concerns), indicating variability in the day-to-day reliability of hands-on care.
Communication and administrative responsiveness are another common theme. While some families praise individual managers and the way they keep relatives informed, others recount poor communication after move-in, slow or missing responses to emails/phone calls, unexplained room moves, difficulties arranging insurance or out-of-state paperwork, delayed deposit refunds and disputes over fees. Multiple accounts describe frustration with management turnover or corporate decisions that reviewers felt prioritized profit over consistent resident care — including fee increases shortly after move-in and non-refundable community fees. The result is a polarized set of experiences: some families feel very involved and supported, while others feel unheard and inadequately informed.
Security and emergency preparedness surface as an area of mixed feedback. Several reviewers praise fall-risk monitoring, quick call-button responses, notification necklaces and general safety of outdoor seating. Conversely, others note issues such as doors that lock at night, lack of a continuously staffed front desk, potential emergency egress delays and memory-care wandering risks. Transportation is another area of inconsistency: while transportation to appointments is offered and valued by many, there are multiple reports of shuttle drivers missing pick-ups or being unable to find a doctor’s office, leading to extra out-of-pocket transport costs.
Memory-care impressions are similarly split. Some reviewers applaud the memory-care design and specialized outings, reporting exceptional compassion and good outcomes for residents with dementia. Other reviewers raise significant red flags — including cleanliness problems in memory-care wings, questionable staff handling of combative residents, lack of call-for-help systems in specific areas and dim, somber lighting that some family members found disconcerting. These mixed reports suggest that memory care quality can be highly dependent on which staff are on duty and whether enough experienced personnel are available.
Finally, the reviews indicate a polarized overall reputation: many families highly recommend Escalante at the Lakes for its caring staff, varied activities, amenities and attractive facility; others strongly caution against it because of management instability, inconsistent care during staff turnover, and serious incidents of neglect or poor communication. Prospective families should weigh these patterns carefully: the facility appears capable of providing warm, engaged, and well-resourced care when staffing and leadership are stable, but some reviewers describe sufficiently troubling lapses that led them to move loved ones elsewhere. If considering Escalante, prospective residents and families should (1) ask specifically about current staffing ratios and night/after-hours coverage, (2) request recent incident and staffing-change histories, (3) meet the specific caregivers who will be working with the prospective resident, (4) clarify all fees, deposit/refund policies and minimum-stay rules in writing, and (5) tour the specific unit (memory care vs assisted living) at different times of day to observe real-time staff-resident interactions and cleanliness.
