The reviews for Highland Square Nursing & Rehabilitation present a highly polarized and mixed picture: many reviewers praise caring staff, meaningful activities, and individualized attention, while a substantial number report serious lapses in cleanliness, safety, food, communication, and administration. That split is a central theme — a family may find warm, attentive nursing and an active social program for their loved one, while another family reports neglect, safety incidents, or frightening sanitation problems. This variability suggests inconsistent performance by shift, unit, or over time.
Care quality and staff behavior: The most frequent positive comments center on compassionate, attentive nursing staff and aides who form personal relationships with residents. Multiple reviewers singled out skilled nurses and dedicated physical and occupational therapists who contributed to meaningful clinical care and rehabilitation. Conversely, many reviews describe rude, dismissive, or even abusive staff. There are repeated, serious allegations of safety neglect — delayed responses after falls, missed medications, bedsores, patients left soiled for hours, and in isolated reports even blood on walls and unmanaged infection devices. Some reviews also allege inappropriate medication use (sedation with Ativan) and lack of records or registration for patients. The pattern is one of high variability: where nurses and aides are engaged, families feel confident; where staff are inexperienced or inattentive, outcomes and safety suffer.
Facilities, cleanliness, and infection concerns: Several reviewers describe clean, tidy rooms and a pleasant-smelling, improved environment under responsive management. However, a troubling number of reviews raise severe sanitation and pest concerns, including reports of bed bugs and even a maggot on the bedroom floor. These allegations are serious and, if accurate, indicate lapses in housekeeping, pest control, and infection prevention. Housekeeping and laundry are repeatedly mentioned both positively and negatively — some praise friendly housekeeping staff, while others report sheets not changed, rooms dirty, or staff too lazy to perform basic tasks.
Dining and nutrition: Dining receives mixed-to-negative feedback overall. A subset of families and residents appreciate home-style meals, fresh salads, and a supportive kitchen crew. Yet many more reviews condemn the food quality — unidentifiable or “jail-house” meat, inadequate portions, low protein content, and failure to honor dietary restrictions. Several reviewers link poor nutrition to weight loss in residents. The dietary department is described as medically oriented but reportedly not well-equipped to handle special diets in some cases, and some families perceive cost-cutting that has harmed food quality.
Activities, socialization, and quality of life: One of the facility’s consistent strengths is its Activities Department. Numerous reviewers praise an active calendar with music, bingo, tea time, talent shows, movies, discussions, and local trips. These offerings are repeatedly described as prioritizing socialization, boosting resident morale, and helping families feel their loved ones are engaged. Some rooms feel homier when residents bring personal furniture, and common spaces are described as bright and open, which supports social life. A few reviews, however, mention a reliance on television when activity support is limited and cite restricted visitor policies or isolation concerns in certain circumstances.
Administration, communication, and operations: Communication and administration emerge as persistent problem areas for many reviewers. Common complaints include long phone hold times, automated systems that impede contact, repeated paperwork requests and delays in documentation, and unclear or delayed communication about repairs and incidents. Some families report billing or vendor issues (e.g., concerns about Spectrum payment or unpaid entertainers) and feel the facility is focused on money rather than care. At the same time, other reviewers praise specific administrative staff (Miss Gail, pandemic-era leadership and family liaisons) for responsiveness and compassion. These conflicting accounts point to inconsistency in management responsiveness or variable experiences across different administrators or time periods.
Safety, regulatory concerns, and extreme allegations: Several reviews describe incidents that raise safety and regulatory red flags: unmanaged infections, patients left without medications, serious falls with delayed checks, allegations of infestations, and one-off accounts of maggots. There are also claims of mismanaged admissions and a patient not properly registered. While these severe allegations were not uniformly reported by all reviewers, their presence in multiple summaries warrants close attention from prospective families and regulators. They indicate that some shifts or units may be under-resourced or inadequately supervised.
Overall impression and guidance: The overall sentiment is mixed with strong polarization. For some families Highland Square provides excellent, compassionate care with strong social programming and helpful therapists; for others the facility has dangerous lapses in cleanliness, communication, and safety. The most consistent strengths are the Activities Department and the presence of caring individual staff members. The most consistent concerns are sanitation, food quality, medication and safety management, and administrative communication. Prospective residents and families should: (1) tour multiple times at different hours/shifts to assess consistency, (2) ask specifically about infection control, pest management, medication administration procedures, fall protocols, and staffing ratios, (3) request references from current families and inquire about how the facility handled recent incidents, and (4) verify how dietary needs and therapy services will be managed. The facility appears capable of providing very good care in many cases, but the variability and the severity of some complaints justify thorough due diligence before placement.
