General Warehousing Storage · Illinois

575 - Production Planning Chicago

Chicago, IL · ~27 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.5
Avg TCR
5.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

575 - Production Planning Chicago runs at 8% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical General Warehousing Storage workplace, earning a grade A.

575 - Production Planning Chicago: 0.5 TCR = 8% of General Warehousing Storage BLS 5.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

575 - Production Planning Chicago safety composite

575 - Production Planning Chicago scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 95% 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

78/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.47 per 100 workers

Safer than 95% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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%).

575 - Production Planning Chicago held a steady TCR band

575 - Production Planning Chicago's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 3.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.0 · 2017=0.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=3.8 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 493190 · Chicago, IL AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.5 · 8% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/25
  • PHOTO Plant 41
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~27 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Plant 41 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

575 - Production Planning Chicago in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows 575 - Production Planning Chicago averages 0.5 TCR (8% of the General Warehousing Storage BLS benchmark).

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

575 - Production Planning Chicago TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=0 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=3.8 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 5.8

Where 575 - Production Planning Chicago falls in its industry

453 General Warehousing Storage establishments

Safer than 95% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 25 General Warehousing Storage employers in Illinois.

575 - Production Planning Chicago (27 employees, TCR 0.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.7 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 02004006008001,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate 575 - Production Planning Chicago
575 - Production Planning Chicago (27 employees, TCR 0.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.7

575 - Production Planning Chicago has fewer employees than the General Warehousing Storage median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.7. 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 3.8 0.0 1 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

493190 · IL · Chicago

453 General Warehousing Storage employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 2,934 employers in Chicago, IL · 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 Plant 41 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR International Matex Tank and Terminal 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR MS - Richmond, KY - 1BGKY 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR 0K35 - DALLAS DISTRIBUTION CENTER 0.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Pizzo Native Plant Nursery, LLC 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE C070 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE Stonington, IL-R&D 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bloomington 27 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago Public Schools 49,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago/Corporate 18,831 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Illinois at Chicago 13,092 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Service UIC UIC Campus 12,732 FTE
NAT-TCR LeHigh Acres 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Michigan Scientific Corporation 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Fun Company 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Castle and Key Distillery 0.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE 572 - Harrison 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE 013g - Orlando Fas 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE 002k - Owatonna Mn Rntl 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE OR - Hewlett Packard 27 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, 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.