Overall sentiment: Reviews for Five Points at Lake Highlands are highly polarized, with many families and residents offering glowing praise for the facility’s rehabilitation services, therapy teams, certain nursing and support staff, and leadership — while a significant number of other reviewers allege serious care, safety, and management problems. A substantial subset of reviews describes the campus as beautiful, recently remodeled in places, well-maintained, and comfortable, and many reviewers explicitly recommend the facility. Conversely, a recurring set of reports documents neglectful care, poor hygiene, missed medical treatment, and unprofessional behavior. Taken together, the reviews indicate that the facility can deliver excellent care under engaged leadership and well-performing teams, but that care quality appears inconsistent across shifts, wings, and time periods.
Care quality and clinical safety: Clinical experiences vary widely in reviewers’ accounts. Numerous families praise attentive nurses, effective wound care, timely medical oversight, and therapists who produced measurable functional gains. Several reviewers reported that doctors were impressed and that wounds and skin conditions healed well under the facility’s care. However, an equally large and alarming set of reviews documents missed vital sign checks, missed insulin and other medications, delayed responses to acute changes, untreated infections that progressed to serious conditions, and allegations of residents being left in soiled diapers for hours. There are multiple reports of severe adverse events (blood infections, pneumonia, ICU transfers, transfusions, and deaths) and claims that records or communications about those events were mishandled. These clinical-concern reports represent important safety red flags: families repeatedly emphasize the need for vigilant monitoring and frequent advocacy to prevent harm.
Staffing, professionalism, and culture: Staff behavior and professionalism are focal points for both praise and complaint. Many reviewers single out CNAs, nurses, therapists, and support staff as compassionate, skillful, and going “above and beyond.” Several individual staff members (named CNAs, nurses, wound care specialists, the DON, and administrators) received strong positive recognition for care, responsiveness, and leadership. At the same time, numerous reviews describe rude, uncaring, or lazy staff; hidden badges; cursing; screening of calls; and unhelpful HR or front-desk interactions. Short-staffing is a frequent concern — especially on weekends and nights — with attendant consequences such as slow call-bell response times, fewer activities, and delays in medication or hygiene care. Multiple reviews suggest variability in staff competence and oversight, and some families say management does not consistently monitor or correct poor staff performance.
Management and administration: Management receives both strong praise and sharp criticism. Several reviews highlight a hands-on, responsive administrator and an engaged DON who personally advocate for residents, resolve issues quickly, and support staff. Those positive accounts often coincide with reports of good transitions, prompt responses via email/phone, and improved service after management changes. Conversely, other reviewers describe unresponsive administration, alleged cover-ups, ignored requests for records, unresolved billing disputes, privacy violations (being listed as a representative and receiving unwanted calls), and slow problem resolution. This split suggests that administrative performance may be uneven across time, departments, or turnover events, and that leadership style materially affects resident/family experience.
Therapy, rehab, and specialized services: Rehabilitation and therapy are among the most consistently praised features. Multiple reviewers report excellent physical, occupational, and speech therapy programs, well-equipped and clean therapy gyms, and therapists who achieved strong recovery outcomes (including regaining walking ability after traumatic injury). The wound-care team and social work services also receive repeated positive mentions. These strengths make the facility attractive for post-acute rehab and wound management when those teams are fully staffed and engaged.
Facility, amenities, and environment: Many reviews applaud the campus: pleasant grounds, outdoor patios, homelike common areas, remodeled wings, and private-room features such as large bathrooms and walk-in showers. On-site amenities noted include a gift shop, beauty shop, chapel, laundry, and a small café. However, other reviewers cite hygiene problems such as mold smell, urine/fecal odors, bedbug reports, dirty rooms, and inadequate cleaning on some wings. This again points to variability: physical plant and amenities are strong in many respects, but maintenance and cleaning standards are not uniformly experienced by all families.
Dining and activities: Activity programming and family events are repeatedly described as inclusive and proactive, with a dedicated Activities Director and frequent offerings such as bingo and ticket rewards. Yet weekend programming and staff to support activities may be reduced at times. Food quality receives mixed feedback: several reviews call meals delicious and satisfying, while others report cold, repetitive, or poor-quality food and lack of encouragement or assistance at mealtimes for residents who need help.
Operational and safety concerns: Multiple operational issues recur in negative reviews: missing or stolen belongings, inconsistent laundry services, billing and refund disputes, and privacy/communications concerns. Safety lapses — including missing bed rails, delayed reporting of injuries, and poor infection-control practices — are mentioned in several serious complaints. Some reviewers express concern about pandemic-era mask noncompliance and infection-control issues. These operational gaps compound clinical concerns when staffing is thin or oversight is inconsistent.
Patterns and recommendations for families: The reviews collectively suggest this facility can provide excellent rehabilitative and nursing care when leadership, therapy, and nursing teams are fully engaged and adequately staffed. However, quality appears highly variable: positive experiences often reference specific staff and administrators, whereas negative outcomes frequently correlate with weekends, staff shortages, or wings where oversight is weaker. Multiple reviewers recommend active family advocacy — visiting, monitoring care, confirming medications and vital checks, and communicating directly with the administrator or DON when possible. Prospective residents and families should ask specific questions about staffing levels (especially on weekends/nights), medication and vital sign protocols, infection-control processes, staff turnover, incident reporting procedures, and the facility’s process for addressing grievances, and they should seek references from recent residents whose needs mirror their own.
Conclusion: Five Points at Lake Highlands demonstrates clear strengths — notably in therapy/rehab, wound care, engaged administrators and certain compassionate staff — but also shows repeating and serious concerns around inconsistent clinical care, staffing shortages, hygiene, and communication. The overall picture is polarized: many very positive, specific experiences exist alongside multiple reports of neglect and harm. Families considering this facility should weigh the potential for excellent rehabilitative services and dedicated staff against documented risks, perform thorough inquiries about current staffing and oversight, and maintain active involvement and advocacy while their loved one is in care.
