ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Ashford Place Health Campus has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about its operations and care quality. It ranks #214 out of 505 facilities in Indiana, placing it in the top half, but its low grade raises red flags for families. The facility is improving, with incidents decreasing from 8 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025, although it still has a concerning history of fines totaling $28,886, which is higher than 95% of other facilities in the state. Staffing levels are average with a turnover rate of 32%, which is better than the state average, and there is adequate RN coverage. However, there are serious weaknesses, including critical incidents like failed protections against sexual abuse between residents, and a serious incident where a resident fell and sustained fractures due to improper transfer assistance. Additionally, there have been concerns about food safety, as meals were served at unsafe temperatures. Families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering Ashford Place for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Indiana
- #214/505
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 32% turnover. Near Indiana's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $28,886 in fines. Higher than 79% of Indiana facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 35 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Indiana. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 31 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
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 (32%)
16 points below Indiana average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Indiana average (3.1)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
14pts below Indiana avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 31 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
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 bathing, as scheduled, to 1 of 3 residents reviewed for bat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure interventions to prevent falls were effectively implemented when Resident C exhibited signs and symptoms of lethargy, drowsiness, an...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
7 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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely address a grievance for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dignity (Resident B).
Findings include:
The clinical record for Resident B was ...
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the required medical and contact information was sent to the hospital for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for discharge. (Resident 54)
Find...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to timely revise a resident's care plans for refusal of showers and depression with individualized interventions for 1 of 5 resid...
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
2. The clinical record for Resident 16 was reviewed on 4/30/24 at 9:31 a.m. Resident 16's diagnoses included, but not limited to, diabetes type II, gout, chronic kidney disease, anxiety disorder, and ...
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: an ophthalmic (eye) medication was labeled wi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Laboratory Services
(Tag F0770)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to timely obtain a urinalysis, as ordered by the physician, for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident 23).
Findings...
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 maintain an infection prevention and control policy by not performing hand hygiene prior to glove use and after dropping a pi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
12 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from sexual abuse by not ap...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
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 have the interdisciplinary team (IDT) determine and document that s...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report to the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH) resident to resident sexual activity without the competency to consent for 2 of 2 residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 accurately complete an admission Minimum Data Set Ass...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to revise a resident's hearing loss care plan to include the use of an amplifier device for 1 of 16 residents whose care plans w...
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for a resident who was unable to carry out activities of dail...
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to inform the physician of blood sugar results below 150, as ordered by the physician, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for insulin (Resident 21)....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Dental Services
(Tag F0791)
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 timely address a dental referral for 1 of 2 residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify and implement an effective corrective plan of action to address two residents that were having sexual interactions. This affected ...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain contact isolation precautions for 1 of 6 resident reviewed for infections (Resident 13).
Findings include:
The clinical record for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident had a true infection with the usage of an antibiotic prophylactically for the prevention of Urinary Tract infections (UTI...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0886
(Tag F0886)
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 test a resident who had symptoms of Covid-19 for Covid-19 for 1 of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2020
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a homelike environment by ensuring a resident had sheets on her bed for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for a homelike envir...
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 ensure that all information necessary to meet the resident's needs was provided to the receiving provider for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for ...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide one on one activities, as care planned, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dementia care. (Resident 30)
Findings includ...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to follow a physician's order for daily weights and notification of a physician if weight greater than or less than 2 pounds in a day or 5 pou...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
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 services to maintain or restore continence and to ensure ca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Dental Services
(Tag F0791)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow through with a dental recommendation for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dental status and services. (Resident 30)
Findi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0808
(Tag F0808)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to serve a therapeutic diet as ordered by the physician for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for food (Resident 33)
Findings include:
Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Antibiotic Stewardship
(Tag F0881)
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 promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring the appropriate use of a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to serve food at appropriate temperatures with the potential to affect 59 of 59 residents served from kitchen and the main dinning room.
Findin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
3. On 1/21/2020 at 12:18 p.m., Resident 155 was observed in the assist dining room being assisted to eat by CRCA (Certified Resident Care Associate). She assisted him to take a bite of food and then w...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 32% turnover. Below Indiana's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s), $28,886 in fines, Payment denial on record. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 31 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $28,886 in fines. Higher than 94% of Indiana facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (38/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Ashford Place Health Campus's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Indiana, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Ashford Place Health Campus Staffed?
CMS rates ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 32%, compared to the Indiana average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Ashford Place Health Campus?
State health inspectors documented 31 deficiencies at ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS during 2020 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 29 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Ashford Place Health Campus?
ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS 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 68 certified beds and approximately 51 residents (about 75% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SHELBYVILLE, Indiana.
How Does Ashford Place Health Campus Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (32%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Ashford Place Health Campus?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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 facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Ashford Place Health Campus Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 3-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 Ashford Place Health Campus Stick Around?
ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS has a staff turnover rate of 32%, 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 Ashford Place Health Campus Ever Fined?
ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS has been fined $28,886 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Indiana average of $33,368. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Ashford Place Health Campus on Any Federal Watch List?
ASHFORD PLACE HEALTH CAMPUS 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.