Group homes, intellectual and developmental disability · New York

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp

Utica, NY · ~24 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
10.3
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp runs at 272% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Group homes, intellectual and developmental disability workplace, earning a grade F.

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp: 10.3 TCR = 272% of Group homes, intellectual and developmental disability BLS 3.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp safety composite

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 23%), 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).

D

50/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 10.32 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% 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%).

TCR Δ

−27.1

2016→2023

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp injury rate improved

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp's TCR fell 27.1 from 27.1 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2016 at 27.1 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=27.1 · 2017=5.7 · 2018=5.6 · 2020=26.2 · 2021=0.4 · 2022=7.2 · 2023=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623210 · Utica, NY ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 10.3 · 272% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #238/336
  • PHOTO Eden Home Health - R…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~24 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Eden Home Health - Reno (0.0 TCR gap)

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

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows 2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp averages 10.3 TCR (272% of the Group homes, intellectual and developmental disability BLS benchmark).

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

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp TCR series: 2016=27.1 · 2017=5.7 · 2018=5.6 · 2020=26.2 · 2021=0.4 · 2022=7.2 · 2023=0 · BLS 3.8

Where 2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp falls in its industry

2,261 Group homes, intellectual and establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New York alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #238 safest of 336 Group homes, intellectual and employers in New York.

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp (24 employees, TCR 10.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 0200400600 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate 2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp
2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp (24 employees, TCR 10.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 5.8

2004-Ucpmc-Dimeo Crp has fewer employees than the Group homes, intellectual and developmen median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 7.2 7.2 1 0 0
2021 0.4 0.4 4 0 0
2020 26.2 13.1 4 0 0
2018 5.6 5.6 1 0 0
2017 5.7 0.0 1 0 0
2016 27.1 0.0 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623210 · NY · Utica

2,261 Group homes, intellectual and developmental disability employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 21,008 rated employers in New York with headcount on file · 148 employers in Utica, NY · 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 Eden Home Health - Reno 10.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Springbrook NY Inc - Susquehanna 10.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bristol Adult Resource Center (agency) 10.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Life Services Alternatives 10.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bittner Singer Orchards 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wegmans Organic Farm 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lawnel Farms 2 LLC 24 FTE
STATE-SIZE Dairy 24 FTE
CITY-NEAR Resource Center for Independent Living 3,351 FTE
CITY-NEAR Faxton St. Lukes 1,727 FTE
CITY-NEAR St Elizabeth Medical Center 1,324 FTE
CITY-NEAR Utica University 915 FTE
NAT-TCR Hialeah, Fl #00346 10.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Aperion Care Spring Valley 10.3 TCR
NAT-TCR MC Logistics LLC 10.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Trilogy Home Healthcare-Jacksonville 10.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE American Red Cross - 65 N Commerce St 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hawaii Petroleum, LLC.-Hilo 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE Raleigh, Nc #00097 24 FTE
NAT-SIZE Eversource - Portsmouth 24 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.