WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
The Willows of Shelbyville has a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and a poor overall quality of care. It ranks #505 out of 505 in Indiana, placing it in the bottom tier of facilities statewide. However, it shows a trend of improvement, with issues decreasing from 15 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025. Staffing is a concern due to a high turnover rate of 60%, which is above the state average, and the facility has less RN coverage than 78% of Indiana facilities. Recent inspector findings revealed serious issues, including a failure to implement a resident's behavioral health care plan, which resulted in a physical altercation between residents, as well as concerns about food safety in the kitchen due to improper storage and lack of sanitization measures. While there are no fines on record, the overall staffing and safety issues raise significant red flags for families considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Indiana
- #505/505
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 60% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Indiana facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 27 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Indiana. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 34 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Indiana average (3.1)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
13pts above Indiana avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
12 points above Indiana average of 48%
The Ugly 34 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain kitchen equipment in a clean manner and ensu...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
7 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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review the facility failed to accurately document a resident's code status in the clinical record ...
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to encode minimum data set (MDS) assessments accurately for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. (Resident 44 and Resident 53)
Finding...
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 interview and record review the facility failed to conduct care plan meetings for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident 10)
Findings include:
The clinical record for Resident 10...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure neurological checks, that included vital signs, were fully conducted for a resident who experienced an unwitnessed fall for 1 of 4 r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to redirect residents with wandering behaviors from other residents' rooms resulting in a lack of privacy for other residents fo...
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 store food and silverware properly and wear hair restraints in the kitchen. This had the potential to affect 57 of 57 residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain the kitchen in a cleanly manner and in good repair for the potential to affect 57 of 57 residents in the facility.
F...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
3 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
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's plan of care for behavioral health was implemented and evaluated after having physical behavioral symptom...
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
Deficiency F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with dementia had a care plan with resident-specific interventions in regards to making inappropriate comments towards st...
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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure narcotic medication was administered per physician orders for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration. (Resident E a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
5 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 F0676
(Tag F0676)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's preference for frequency of bathing was honored on a regular basis for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for bathing. (Resident...
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen therapy supplies were maintained in a clean and hygienic manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy...
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
Deficiency F0697
(Tag F0697)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pain medication received pain medications as ordered by their physician. (Resident B)
Findings include...
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
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an insulin pen was properly labeled for use for 1 of 4 residents observed during 1 of 2 medication pass observations wi...
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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure facility staff appropriately sanitized a glucometer (testing machine for blood sugar levels) utilized for multiple resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
10 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
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dignified environment for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for dignity. (Resident C and Resident D)
Findings include:
1. An...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide beneficiary notices for 1 of 3 residents reviewed. (Resident 8)
Findings include:
Beneficiary notifications were reviewed on 7/24/2...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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 file a grievance for a resident voicing missing items for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for missing personal property. (Resident 5)
Findings i...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was initiated for the utilization of a splint for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for range of motion. (Resident ...
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, observation, and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision and/or assistance for 3 of 3 residents observed for eating activities of daily living. (Resident 61, Resi...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the utilization of a gait belt during a transfer for 1 of 1 resident randomly observed. (Resident 30)
Findings include...
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document the outputs as careplanned for a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for urinary catheters....
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure water pitchers were available for resident utilization for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for hydration. (Resident 52 and R...
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 hand hygiene was performed between contact with multiple residents during dining service. (Resident D and Resident 11)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure overhead light fixtures were free of dead insects for all 4 ha...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a call light was within reach for a dependent resident for 1 of 17 residents reviewed for call light use. (Resident 19...
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
2. The clinical record for Resident 29 was reviewed on 4/21/2022 at 5:07 p.m. The medical diagnoses included, but were not limited to, Huntington's disease, psychosis, and anxiety.
A Significant Chan...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provided audiology services for a resident with moderate hearing loss for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hearing/vision (Residen...
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
Based on interview, observations, and record review, the facility failed to care plan a fall interventions for Resident 30, failed to implement post fall interventions of a soft touch call light (Resi...
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
4. The clinical record for Resident B was reviewed on 4/20/2022 at 4:05 p.m. The clinical diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, unspecified dementia, and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed indicate prognosis of 6 months or less for 4 residents on hospice services (Resident B, D, 29, and 64) and failed to accurately complete fall ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to completely assess, including the type and/or staging, of pressure areas for 4 residents (Resident D, 64, 19, and G), failed t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication carts didn't contain expired medications for 4 residents and labeling of an insulin pen in 2 medication car...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "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.
- • 34 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade F (30/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 60% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Willows Of Shelbyville's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Willows Of Shelbyville Staffed?
CMS rates WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE's staffing level at 1 out of 5 stars, which is much below average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 60%, which is 13 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 71%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Willows Of Shelbyville?
State health inspectors documented 34 deficiencies at WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 33 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Willows Of Shelbyville?
WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 121 certified beds and approximately 71 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SHELBYVILLE, Indiana.
How Does Willows Of Shelbyville Compare to Other Indiana Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Indiana, WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (60%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Willows Of Shelbyville?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can you walk me through typical staffing levels on day, evening, and night shifts?" "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?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate and the below-average staffing rating.
Is Willows Of Shelbyville Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE 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 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 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 Willows Of Shelbyville Stick Around?
Staff turnover at WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE is high. At 60%, the facility is 13 percentage points above the Indiana average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 71%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Willows Of Shelbyville Ever Fined?
WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE 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 Willows Of Shelbyville on Any Federal Watch List?
WILLOWS OF SHELBYVILLE 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.