Fountains, the
1260 Williams Way, Yuba City, CA 95991 · Sutter County · 145 certified beds · avg 122 residents/day · certified since Aug 20, 1990
Part of chain: ADVENTIST HEALTH (5 facilities, chain avg rating 4.0★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.33
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.
All citations in the current public record (28)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint |
| Mar 20, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Mar 14, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Apr 20, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. |
| Apr 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. |
| May 6, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| May 6, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. |
| May 6, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| May 6, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 3).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 12 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | California avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.33 | 4.31 | 3.95 | top 37% in California; top 28% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.66 | 0.61 | 0.69 | top 27% in California; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.08 | 3.90 | 3.50 | top 29% in California; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.43 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 41% in California; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 15.0 | 36.7 | 45.8 | top 3% in California; top 1% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 5.6 | 38.1 | 42.9 | top 4% in California; top 2% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.96, RN 0.60, weekend 3.73. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adventist Health System/West | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2018 |
| Stone Point Health | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 04/01/2018 |
| The Fremont-Rideout Health Group | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 06/19/2006 |
| Gonzalez, Eduardo | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/24/2018 |
| Innocent, Larry | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Jobe, Meredith | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Osias, Daniel | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/04/2021 |
| Rawson, Richard | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/24/2018 |
| Reiner, Richard | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
| Wing, Billy | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2018 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
- "How is your kitchen staffed, and have meals ever been delayed because of staffing?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yuba City Post Acute | 0.6 mi | Yuba City, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bridgeview Post Acute | 0.6 mi | Yuba City, CA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Marysville Post-Acute | 2.7 mi | Marysville, CA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| River Valley Care Center | 7.8 mi | Live Oak, CA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Gridley Post Acute | 15.3 mi | Gridley, CA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 555430.