WARSAW MEADOWS
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Warsaw Meadows has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its care quality. It ranks #395 out of 505 nursing homes in Indiana, placing it in the bottom half of facilities statewide, and #5 out of 6 in Kosciusko County, suggesting limited better options nearby. The facility's trend is improving, as the number of issues decreased from 11 in 2024 to 2 in 2025, but there are still serious concerns, including $105,073 in fines, which is higher than 99% of Indiana facilities. Staffing is rated average with a turnover rate of 47%, and while there is more RN coverage than 83% of state facilities, recent inspector findings revealed serious incidents, such as a resident suffering extensive bruising due to inadequate abuse prevention measures and another resident ingesting harmful cleaning chemicals that required emergency care. Overall, while there are some strengths in nursing coverage and a decreasing trend in issues, the significant fines and serious safety incidents raise red flags for families considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Indiana
- #395/505
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 47% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $105,073 in fines. Higher than 56% of Indiana facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 45 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Indiana. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 39 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Indiana average (3.1)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Indiana avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 39 deficiencies on record
Oct 2025
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to prevent physical and emotional abuse for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse prevention. (Residents C & D) This deficient prac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure cleaning chemicals were stored securely on the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
1 deficiency
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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate interventions to prevent the development of pressures ulcers for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ul...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
10 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement effective interventions to prevent physical and verbal Resident to Resident abuse from recurring. This deficient practice resulte...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. The record for Resident 16 was reviewed on 8/8/2024 at 3:37 P.M. Diagnoses included, but were not limited to, alcohol depende...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a baseline care plan meeting and routine care plan meeting ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADLs) regarding shower/bathing opportunities (Residentt 53 and 9) and nail, hair and shavi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to implement an indiviualized activities program for 1 of 3 Residents reviewed for activities. (Resident 1)
Finding includes:
Duri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0691
(Tag F0691)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a residents' urostomy drainage bag was covered for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for urostomies. (Resident 264)
Finding incl...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper labeling and storage of respiratory equipment and provide necessary respiratory services according to physician ...
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 observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure narcotics were counted and documented every shift for 1 of 4 narcotic count log books reviewed. (Freedom cart 1)
Findin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored appropriately, had resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store food under sanitary conditions related to undated and unlabeled foods and drinks in 1 of 1 kitchens (Main kitchen). Thi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure bedtime snacks were offered consistently for residents after the evening meal on 4 of 4 halls. This deficient practice...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
2 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to establish a discharge plan and to ensure documentation was accurat...
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
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a timely notice of discharge was issued for a facility initi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
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
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to update resident care plans for falls and skin issue for 2 of 26 residents whose care plans were reviewed. (Resident 29 & B)
Findings includ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the spice cabinet and range/oven were free of food debris and grease build-up, failed to dispose of expired foods, and...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
1 deficiency
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to supervise a resident, with severe cognitive deficits and wandering behaviors, from exiting the facility resulting in the elopement of Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
20 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an Advanced Directive was in place and signed by the physician for 1 of 24 charts reviewed for Advanced Directives. (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Requirements
(Tag F0622)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the Transfer/Discharge Form for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for discharge and hospitalization. (Residents J and G)
Findings include:
...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that hospital transfer form and transfer discharge was filled out when a Resident went to the emergency room for 1 out...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that a baseline care plan was developed for the resident and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure to revise/update resident care plan for fall in...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0660
(Tag F0660)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure discharge planning was developed for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for discharge. (Resident 156)
Finding includes:
A clinic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 residents reviewed who required assistance for activities of daily living received grooming/shaving and oral ca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate skin care treatment for 1 of 1 resident, and compression stocks were available for 1 of 1 resident. (Reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0685
(Tag F0685)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure assistance to schedule an audiology exam was p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a hand splint was applied for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for limited range of motion. (Resident 52)
Finding includes:
A ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from major injury from fall...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that significant weight loss did not occur for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for nutrition. (Resident 40)
Finding includes:...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. During an observation ,on 8/5/2022 at 1:09 P.M., the trach button for Resident 22 was dated 8/4/2022, and the outer dressing was dated 8/2/2022.
On 8/5/2022 at 1:25 P.M., the Unit Manager brought ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure there was adequate monitoring of medications for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medications. (Resident F)
Findings inclu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 staff (LPN 12) observed administering medication followed the facility's policy and professional standards in re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0805
(Tag F0805)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a recipe was followed for fortified mashed potatoes for 1 of 4 residents who were reviewed for nutrition. (Resident 39)...
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 nursing staff (LPN 12) observed administering medications followed infection control protocols for the preventio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. During the initial tour on 7/30/22, Resident E was observed to have light brown and bright pink lower legs, a wound on the left shin, and some edema to the feet. Resident E indicated she does not w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure items in the refrigerator were dated/labeled, failed to ensure used by dates on a milk container were disposed; failed ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0882
(Tag F0882)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure they had a certified Infection Preventionist on staff, this affects 60 out of 60 residents that reside in the facility....
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 4 harm violation(s), $105,073 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 39 deficiencies on record, including 4 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $105,073 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Indiana. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Warsaw Meadows's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WARSAW MEADOWS an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Warsaw Meadows Staffed?
CMS rates WARSAW MEADOWS's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 47%, compared to the Indiana average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Warsaw Meadows?
State health inspectors documented 39 deficiencies at WARSAW MEADOWS during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 that caused actual resident harm and 35 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Warsaw Meadows?
WARSAW MEADOWS 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 IDE MANAGEMENT GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 80 certified beds and approximately 54 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in WARSAW, Indiana.
How Does Warsaw Meadows Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, WARSAW MEADOWS's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (47%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Warsaw Meadows?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Warsaw Meadows Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WARSAW MEADOWS has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Indiana. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Warsaw Meadows Stick Around?
WARSAW MEADOWS has a staff turnover rate of 47%, 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 Warsaw Meadows Ever Fined?
WARSAW MEADOWS has been fined $105,073 across 1 penalty action. This is 3.1x the Indiana average of $34,130. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Warsaw Meadows on Any Federal Watch List?
WARSAW MEADOWS 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.