496 Wisconsin Court, Fond Du Lac, WI 54937
To contact a resident: (920) 921-5115
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Deerview Meadows - FondDuLac I Costs & Pricing
Deerview Meadows - FondDuLac I offers competitive pricing for its residents, particularly when compared to the broader market rates in Fond du Lac County and the state of Wisconsin. For semi-private rooms, the monthly cost stands at $2,295, significantly lower than the county average of $2,837 and the state average of $3,977. In terms of studios, prices range from $2,595 to $3,538 - again more affordable than both Fond du Lac County's average of $3,435 and Wisconsin's higher standard of $3,999. These rates position Deerview Meadows as an attractive option for those seeking quality care at a reasonable price within the community.
| Floor plans | Deerview Meadows - FondDuLac I | Fond du Lac County | Wisconsin |
|---|---|---|---|
| Semi-Private | $2,295 | $2,837 | $3,977 |
| Studio | $2,595 to $3,538 | $3,435 | $3,999 |
Overall Review of Deerview Meadows - FondDuLac I
Pros
The community looked beautiful.- The grounds and everything were very well maintained.
- The staff was kind and courteous.
- It is a great community.
- The tour went very well.
Cons
The only room available was a small studio apartment and not large enough for the reviewer’s parents.- The facility is not clean.
- The residents are not cared for.
- Deerview offers zero activities for the residents.
- The state has been investigating them.
- They found it unbelievably horrible and couldn't believe it was recommended.
Review
Deerview Meadows - FondDuLac I in Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin is best suited for a solo senior who prizes curb appeal and a courteous staff over expansive living space or robust programming. The campus presents well, with tidy grounds and a polished first impression, and a tour experience that left the reviewer feeling the atmosphere was welcoming. The ideal resident here is someone who can accept a compact living arrangement and a lighter activity calendar while relying on staff for the core daily tasks. It is not a good fit for couples seeking shared living space, and it may fail to serve those who need more than a studio or who rely on a full roster of social and enrichment opportunities.
On the positive side, the physical environment stands out. The grounds are well maintained, common areas appear orderly, and the front-line staff come across as kind and courteous. Those elements can translate into a calm, respectful daily life and predictable, considerate service. For families prioritizing dignity, ease of interaction, and a pleasant first impression, these factors provide a meaningful baseline of comfort, especially for residents who do not require intensive programming or large-scale social engagement.
Yet the concerns raised by other reviewers cannot be ignored. One account describes the facility as not clean and asserts that residents are not cared for, while another characterizes the place as offering zero activities for residents. A third warning notes that the state has been investigating the operation. Taken together, these points portray significant quality-control challenges: sanitation, consistent caregiving, and meaningful resident engagement appear to be seriously deficient. For families, these are not minor caveats but central risks to ongoing well-being.
These negative findings are not easily offset by the positives. In assisted living, cleanliness, reliable caregiving, and an active social calendar are foundational; without them, the everyday experience can quickly deteriorate. The reported lack of activities translates directly into social isolation and diminished cognitive and emotional stimulation. The potential regulatory investigation adds another layer of uncertainty, suggesting possible staffing instability, policy lapses, or compliance concerns that can disrupt routines and erode trust. In practical terms, the appealing environment and courteous service cannot compensate for core deficiencies in care and engagement.
For families weighing options, alternatives with demonstrable cleanliness records, robust daily programming, and transparent oversight are worth prioritizing. If Deerview Meadows remains under consideration, demand current inspection results, recent survey findings, and a concrete plan for improving activities, housekeeping, and staffing. If space and catering to couples are important, seek communities offering larger suites and configurations. A direct conversation with the administrator about staffing patterns, turnover, and the availability of non-studio units will help separate hopeful impressions from likely outcomes.
The bottom line is decisively pragmatic. The property may appeal to someone seeking an aesthetically pleasing, calm setting with courteous staff, but the combination of potential cleanliness and care issues, lack of resident programming, and regulatory questions makes this a decision that requires rigorous verification before commitment. For families prioritizing reliable daily care, predictable social engagement, and a clean, well-regulated environment, this is not the best option among Fond du Lac offerings. If choosing to investigate further, approach with a clear set of expectations, insist on verifiable quality assurances, and compare against alternatives with proven track records before proceeding.
Assisted Living
Memory Care
Cats allowed
Activities off-site
Bath tubs
Devotional services off-site
Indoor common areas
Outdoor common areas
Respite or short term stays offered
Wheelchair accessible showers
Diabetic care
Incontinence care
Medication management
Meals provided
5 Early Indicators of Dementia and What You Can Do
8 Important Indicators That Memory Care May Be Necessary
Delving into the Inner World of Dementia: Insights into Thoughts and Awareness