Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Kentucky

Amber Oaks Assisted Living

Shelbyville, KY · ~26 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.8
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Amber Oaks Assisted Living runs at 73% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade B.

Amber Oaks Assisted Living: 2.8 TCR = 73% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Amber Oaks Assisted Living safety composite

Amber Oaks Assisted Living scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 87% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), blended into one 0-100 breakdown against same-industry peers. A missing measure drops out and redistributes its weight rather than deflating the score. This is a per-dimension breakdown, distinct from the single letter grade above it (which weights TCR alone against the BLS industry benchmark).

B

77/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 2.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 87% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Benchmarked live against every credibly-rated employer in the same NAICS industry code in the current OSHA extract (a segment must have at least 8 rated peers to benchmark). Not a legal or compliance determination; PlainSafetyScore's own weighting (TCR 40%, DART 35%, fatalities 25%).

Amber Oaks Assisted Living held a steady TCR band

Amber Oaks Assisted Living's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 6.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=0.0 · 2018=5.4 · 2019=6.0 · 2020=5.4 · 2021=5.5 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Shelbyville, KY AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.8 · 73% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #12/64
  • PHOTO Waltonwood Lake Boon…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~26 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Waltonwood Lake Boone AL (0.0 TCR gap)

Read with this employer → · Industry book → · Kentucky employers → · Look up another →

Amber Oaks Assisted Living in the TCR neighbourhood

Average Total Case Rate among this establishment and nearest same-industry peers

TCR

What this shows Amber Oaks Assisted Living averages 2.8 TCR (73% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-08-25

Amber Oaks Assisted Living TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=5.4 · 2019=6 · 2020=5.4 · 2021=5.5 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.8

Where Amber Oaks Assisted Living falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 87% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Kentucky alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #12 safest of 64 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Kentucky.

Amber Oaks Assisted Living (26 employees, TCR 2.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 30 entities by Average employees (X) and Total Case Rate (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Larger & higher-riskSmaller & higher-riskLarger & saferSmaller & safer than peers 0100200300 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Amber Oaks Assisted Living
Amber Oaks Assisted Living (26 employees, TCR 2.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Amber Oaks Assisted Living has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. Workforce size and injury rate do not always move together within the same industry -- some of its smaller peers run higher rates than its larger ones, and vice versa.

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 5.5 0.0 1 0 0
2020 5.4 0.0 1 0 0
2019 6.0 6.0 1 0 0
2018 5.4 0.0 1 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · KY · Shelbyville

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,805 rated employers in Kentucky with headcount on file · 73 employers in Shelbyville, KY · 4 cross-state NAT-TCR peers · 4 cross-state NAT-SIZE peers. Closest matches by relationship code are listed below.

Rel Establishment Metric
NAICS-TCR Waltonwood Lake Boone AL 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Canopy at Hickory Creek 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Lake Tavares 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Parkside Court 2.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE 830 Grassy Springs 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE 222-NiSource-Ashland KY-Service Cent 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE 3510 COLEMAN RD PADUCAH KY 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE INTEC Group LLC 26 FTE
CITY-NEAR Martinrea Heavy Stamping 770 FTE
CITY-NEAR Martinrea Heavy Stamping - Shelbyville 437 FTE
CITY-NEAR KACI 370 FTE
CITY-NEAR Katayama American Company Inc. 346 FTE
NAT-TCR Castlerock Development 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Rouses Market #27 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Plastipak- Havre de Grace 2.8 TCR
NAT-TCR US Gypsum Plaster City 2.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE United Manufacturing, Inc. 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Joel Hewatt Co., Inc. 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Toshiba Business Solutions - Miami Lakes 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Toshiba Business Solutions - Boston 26 FTE

Rel codes: NAICS-TCR · STATE-SIZE · CITY-NEAR · NAT-TCR/NAT-SIZE cross-state. Read with this employer →

Data Source: OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA), mandatory establishment-level injury/illness reports. Grades compare employer Total Case Rate (TCR) to BLS IIF industry benchmarks. Data covers years reported by this establishment: 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.