Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed but distinct: many reviewers praise The Highlands at Pittsford for its attractive campus, high-quality dining, wide range of amenities, and active social life, while a significant subset of reviews raises serious and specific concerns about clinical care, staffing reliability, and management. The positives focus heavily on the physical environment and lifestyle offerings, whereas the negatives concentrate on care delivery failures and communication/accountability problems.
Facilities, apartments, and location are consistently highlighted as strengths. Multiple reviewers describe beautiful, well-maintained grounds and buildings, including cottages and varied apartment layouts (one- and two-bedroom units, many well appointed and spacious). Common areas are described as clean and welcoming, with gardens, walking trails, and proximity to the Erie Canal noted as attractive features. Amenities frequently mentioned include a pool, workout room, library, home theater, and convenient onsite services such as a barber shop and small retail shop. The community atmosphere is frequently described as lively and social, with residents enjoying concerts (including Eastman School performers), classic car shows, tribute bands, field trips, and regular arts & crafts and exercise programs.
Dining is a repeatedly emphasized positive. Several reviews call out the dining as “phenomenal” with “masterful chefs,” elegant dining rooms, two in-house restaurants or bistros, and examples of standout meals (including a highly praised Easter meal). Reviewers report healthy, well-prepared menus and a pleasant dining experience. Rehab services and an available nurse practitioner are mentioned positively in multiple summaries, and some reviewers specifically praised rehabilitation care.
Staff and care quality show a clear split in the reviews. Many reviewers characterize staff as kind, compassionate, alert, and engaged—citing warm interactions and staff members who helped families feel comfortable. At the same time, there are multiple, serious complaints about staffing that cannot be overlooked: reports describe short staffing, high turnover, inconsistent caregiving, slow responses to call buttons, and infrequent showers or lapses in basic hygiene. More alarming are multiple specific allegations in reviews of severe clinical neglect—examples include claims of severe dehydration, no oral care for days, no water provided, and a resident being returned to the hospital in very poor condition. Other concerning incidents reported by reviewers include staff keeping a complainant’s cellphone out of reach and delays (reported as up to 2.5 hours) in contacting supervisors. These are presented by reviewers as factual experiences; prospective residents and families should view them as significant red flags to investigate further.
Management, communication, and accountability receive mixed to negative commentary. Several reviews portray administration as profit‑focused or cold‑hearted, and some families report being lied to or bullied by staff or management. Communication problems—especially around care escalation and follow-up—are repeatedly mentioned. COVID-related visitation restrictions and instances of initial isolation were also cited as negative experiences by some reviewers (though these may reflect past pandemic-era policies). Conversely, a number of reviewers praise staff openness and clear explanations during tours or interactions, indicating variability by staff member and situation.
Price and availability are practical considerations reflected in reviews. The community is described as relatively expensive by multiple reviewers, with one price point mentioned around $7,000/month; availability can be limited. Some reviewers noted favorable contractual features like no level-of-care fee, while others felt the cost was high relative to their needs. Several accounts also indicate the community operates on a buy-in model, which is an important financial detail for prospective residents.
Given these patterns, a balanced interpretation is that The Highlands at Pittsford offers a high-quality physical environment, excellent dining, and a broad, active program of amenities that many residents enjoy. However, there is a nontrivial volume of reviews reporting serious care and staffing problems, ranging from inconsistent service and slow responses to specific and severe allegations of neglect and poor management behavior. These contrasting themes suggest the resident experience can vary widely depending on staffing levels, unit, and timing.
Recommendations for prospective residents or family members based on review themes: during a tour, observe staff-resident interactions and mealtime service, ask for current staffing ratios and turnover statistics, request incident and complaint resolution history, ask specifically about clinical oversight (nurse practitioner access, protocols for dehydration/falls, response times), verify contractual terms (buy-in, level-of-care fees, pricing), and speak to current families or residents about recent experiences. If considering memory care or higher-acuity services, request specifics about staff training, supervision, and examples of emergency escalation. Finally, ask for references or recent inspection/quality reports to corroborate claims one way or the other.
In summary, reviews paint The Highlands at Pittsford as a well-appointed, active community with excellent dining and many amenities, but also one where serious care-related complaints and management concerns have been reported by multiple families. Prospective residents should weigh the strong lifestyle benefits against the reported risks by conducting thorough, targeted due diligence on staffing, care protocols, and how the community handles complaints and clinical incidents.
