PADDOCK SPRINGS
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Paddock Springs in Warsaw, Indiana, has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice for care, as it falls within the 70-79 range on the grading scale. It ranks #176 out of 505 facilities in Indiana, placing it in the top half, and is #3 out of 6 in Kosciusko County, indicating that only two local options are better. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from five in 2024 to two in 2025. Staffing is rated average with a turnover of 38%, which is better than the state average of 47%, suggesting some staff stability. Notably, Paddock Springs has had no fines, which is a positive sign. However, there are some concerns. A serious incident involved a medication error due to unclear discharge orders, leading to hospitalization for one resident. Additionally, another resident experienced pressure ulcers that were not identified or treated in time, highlighting potential gaps in care. While there are strengths in staffing stability and no fines, families should be aware of these specific issues when considering Paddock Springs for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Indiana
- #176/505
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 38% turnover. Near Indiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 47 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Indiana. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ○ Average
- 8 deficiencies on record. Average for a facility this size. Mostly minor or procedural issues.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (38%)
10 points below Indiana average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Indiana avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 8 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement timely and effective interventions to prevent abrasions due to bed placement for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for skin alterations. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to identify a pressure ulcer until it was necrotic and deemed an unstageable ulcer, implement orders for treatment timely and obtain and imple...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
5 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to clarify conflicting hospital discharge orders and previous medicati...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician of medications held for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for physician notification (Resident 4).
Finding includes:
The clinic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure interventions were in place to prevent a deep tissue injury (DTI) wound after admission for 1 of 2 residents reviewed f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to administer a physician ordered medication for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident 12)
Finding includes:
The re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed related to lack of changing gloves and handwashing during perineal care and w...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2022
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure comprehensive mental health services twere obtained for 1 of 1 resident reviewed. (Resident 29)
Findings include:
Resident 29's recor...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
- • 38% turnover. Below Indiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 8 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Paddock Springs's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PADDOCK SPRINGS an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Paddock Springs Staffed?
CMS rates PADDOCK SPRINGS's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the Indiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Paddock Springs?
State health inspectors documented 8 deficiencies at PADDOCK SPRINGS during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 7 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Paddock Springs?
PADDOCK SPRINGS is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by TRILOGY HEALTH SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 56 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in WARSAW, Indiana.
How Does Paddock Springs Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, PADDOCK SPRINGS's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Paddock Springs?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Paddock Springs Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PADDOCK SPRINGS has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Paddock Springs Stick Around?
PADDOCK SPRINGS has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for Indiana nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Paddock Springs Ever Fined?
PADDOCK SPRINGS has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Paddock Springs on Any Federal Watch List?
PADDOCK SPRINGS is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.