Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) · Arkansas

2nd Street, P-19719

Fort Smith, AR · ~333 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

2nd Street, P-19719 runs at 50% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) workplace, earning a grade A.

2nd Street, P-19719: 1.6 TCR = 50% of Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

2nd Street, P-19719 safety composite

2nd Street, P-19719 scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 84% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 54%), 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

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.65 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0.46 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 54% 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

−4.1

2019→2024

2nd Street, P-19719 injury rate improved

2nd Street, P-19719's TCR fell 4.1 from 4.6 in 2019 to 0.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 4.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.28× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=4.6 · 2020=1.4 · 2021=1.1 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=0.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311615 · Fort Smith, AR AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.6 · 50% of ind

  • DART 0.5 DART
  • RANK #11/69
  • PHOTO John Soules Foods
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 25 inj
  • SIZE ~333 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: John Soules Foods (0.0 TCR gap)

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

2nd Street, P-19719 in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows 2nd Street, P-19719 averages 1.6 TCR (50% of the Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) BLS benchmark).

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

2nd Street, P-19719 TCR series: 2019=4.6 · 2020=1.4 · 2021=1.1 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=0.5 · BLS 3.3

Where 2nd Street, P-19719 falls in its industry

509 Chickens, processing, fresh, f establishments

Safer than 84% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arkansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 69 Chickens, processing, fresh, f employers in Arkansas.

2nd Street, P-19719 (333 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate 2nd Street, P-19719
2nd Street, P-19719 (333 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5

2nd Street, P-19719 has fewer employees than the Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, can median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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 0.5 0.5 2 0 0
2023 1.2 0.9 5 0 0
2022 1.2 0.9 4 0 0
2021 1.1 0.4 3 0 0
2020 1.4 1.4 4 0 0
2019 4.6 2.0 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311615 · AR · Fort Smith

509 Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 4,393 rated employers in Arkansas with headcount on file · 249 employers in Fort Smith, AR · 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 John Soules Foods 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hurlock Feedmill & Hatchery #26 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Peco Foods Processing Plant 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Fieldale Farms - Cornelia Plant 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bekaert Rogers 333 FTE
STATE-SIZE BERRYHS 333 FTE
STATE-SIZE W&W|AFCO Steel Little Rock 333 FTE
STATE-SIZE Southeast Poulty 333 FTE
CITY-NEAR MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH 1,944 FTE
CITY-NEAR ABB Motors and Mechanical, Inc. - Fort Smith 1,298 FTE
CITY-NEAR Fort Smith - 5713 RS Boreham Jr Street 985 FTE
CITY-NEAR Baptist Health Medical Center - Fort Smith 970 FTE
NAT-TCR Women's Specialty Services 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Shepherd of The Valley Lutheran Retirement Inc 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Inland Asphalt Company 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Bergelectric Corp. CA 1.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Sharp Electronics Corporation 333 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kollmorgen 501 W. Main St. 333 FTE
NAT-SIZE C75 333 FTE
NAT-SIZE Operations - Lakeville, MN 333 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.