Overall sentiment: The reviews for Four Fountains are deeply mixed but skew strongly negative. Many reviewers describe severe failures in basic nursing-home care—ranging from neglect and unsanitary conditions to safety failures that led to serious injury and death. At the same time, a minority of reviews praise specific staff members, particularly CNAs and therapy personnel, and some families describe positive rehab outcomes. The pattern that emerges is one of inconsistent quality: pockets of dedicated, competent staff and effective therapy exist amid systemic problems that frequently put residents' wellbeing at risk.
Care quality and resident safety: A dominant theme across the reviews is poor and neglectful care. Multiple accounts report residents left in urine and feces for extended periods, missed basic hygiene (bathing, teeth brushing), missed medications and IV antibiotics, and unattended or unsecured medication carts. There are repeated reports of falls, delayed or mishandled transfers to hospitals, and allegations that critical conditions (infections, gangrene, respiratory decline) were not recognized or addressed in time. Several reviewers explicitly attribute serious harm and even death to the facility’s inadequate care. These recurring safety concerns are often linked to chronic understaffing and to staff appearing overwhelmed or inattentive.
Staffing, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior: Staffing is the most frequently cited operational problem. Reviewers describe an environment where there are too few staff for the patient load, nurses and aides are frequently unavailable or appear rushed, and some staff display dismissive or uncaring attitudes. Conversely, many reviews single out individual CNAs, some LPNs and therapy staff as compassionate and competent—often credited with providing the best aspects of care. This contrast suggests high variability in staff performance and that the positive experiences depend heavily on which employees are on duty. Numerous reviews also criticize managerial behavior—accusing administrators and, in particular, the director of nursing (DON) of poor responsiveness, denial of appropriate care (e.g., hospice evaluations), and being disengaged from floor-level problems.
Facility condition and cleanliness: Reviews about the physical plant are mixed but include troubling descriptions: peeling paint, exposed wood framing, patched/unpainted walls, and explicit reports of bed bugs and dirty sheets. Several accounts report foul odors and comparisons to kennels, as well as blood or urine on floors. At least one reviewer praised a clean facility; however, the negative descriptions of sanitation and maintenance are frequent and severe enough to raise infection control and resident comfort concerns.
Rehabilitation, therapy, and activities: Rehabilitation and therapy receive some of the clearest positive feedback—multiple reviewers describe an excellent rehab department with attentive therapists who collaborate well with nursing staff and CNAs, and who helped residents return home. Yet other reviewers say therapy was insufficient or inconsistent (for example, only nine therapy days in a 55-day stay), indicating variability in therapy delivery. Activities are noted as being offered with posted schedules in a few reports, suggesting that programming exists, but engagement and adequacy likely vary by unit and by resident.
Dining and nutrition: Dining receives mostly negative mention where cited—some reviewers report extremely poor food quality (for example, cold baloney and cheese sandwiches or “slop”), which, combined with reports of dehydration, suggests concerns about both food quality and monitoring of intake. Positive comments on dining are rare in the dataset.
Management, communication, and administrative issues: Communication and administrative responsiveness are recurrent pain points. Families report delays or failures in notifying them about incidents, poor phone reception and long hold times, receptionist lines full or calls disconnected, and at least one account of restricted access requiring DNA proof to visit. Billing disputes, threats of discharge, and alleged financial mistreatment or coercion appear multiple times. Several reviewers plan to file complaints with state authorities; some mention state investigations or recommend them. Allegations of cover-ups or misstatements about cause of death were reported in the most serious accounts. These patterns indicate systemic problems in transparency, documentation, and grievance handling.
Notable patterns and risk indicators: The reviews collectively point to several red flags that families should weigh carefully: repeated understaffing, inconsistent staff competency, reports of basic-care neglect (hygiene, toileting, medication administration), unsafe conditions (falls, unsecured equipment), sanitation issues (bed bugs, dirty linens, bodily fluids on floors), and serious administrative failings (poor communication, billing threats, alleged cover-ups). The co-occurrence of these problems in many reviews suggests systemic issues rather than isolated incidents, although the presence of strong positive experiences indicates variability across shifts, wings, or periods of stay.
Conclusion and guidance: If considering Four Fountains, families should do in-person visits at different times of day and on weekends, ask for recent state inspection reports and outcomes of any investigations, inquire specifically about staffing ratios and turnover, review the therapy and nursing schedules, and confirm procedures for incident notification and hospice referrals. For current residents, families should document concerns in writing, escalate to the facility administration and state ombudsman, and consider insisting on immediate alternatives if basic care or safety is compromised. The reviews show that while there are compassionate and skilled staff members providing high-quality rehab care for some residents, there are systemic lapses and severe allegations that have led multiple families to lose trust in the facility’s ability to provide safe, consistent long-term care.
