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

ACC Greenhaven Terrace

Sacramento, CA · ~59 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.7
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

ACC Greenhaven Terrace runs at 123% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade D.

ACC Greenhaven Terrace: 4.7 TCR = 123% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

ACC Greenhaven Terrace safety composite

ACC Greenhaven Terrace scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 84% 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).

C

70/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 4.69 per 100 workers

Safer than 71% 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%).

TCR Δ

−0.6

2016→2021

ACC Greenhaven Terrace injury rate improved

ACC Greenhaven Terrace's TCR fell 0.6 from 0.6 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 11.4 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.6 · 2017=10.9 · 2018=5.2 · 2019=11.4 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Sacramento, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.7 · 123% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #97/635
  • PHOTO SPRING ARBOR OF CROF…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~59 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SPRING ARBOR OF CROFTON (0.0 TCR gap)

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

ACC Greenhaven Terrace in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows ACC Greenhaven Terrace averages 4.7 TCR (123% 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

ACC Greenhaven Terrace TCR series: 2016=0.6 · 2017=10.9 · 2018=5.2 · 2019=11.4 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · BLS 3.8

Where ACC Greenhaven Terrace falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 71% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #97 safest of 635 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in California.

ACC Greenhaven Terrace (59 employees, TCR 4.7) 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 ACC Greenhaven Terrace
ACC Greenhaven Terrace (59 employees, TCR 4.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

ACC Greenhaven Terrace has more 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 11.4 11.4 2 0 0
2018 5.2 5.2 1 0 0
2017 10.9 10.9 2 0 0
2016 0.6 0.6 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · CA · Sacramento

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 1,348 employers in Sacramento, CA · 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 SPRING ARBOR OF CROFTON 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Millbrae Assisted Living LLC 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Waterford at Creekside 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Gardens of Scottsdale 4.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE DFFF-Salinas 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE LOMA 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE J.R. AG SOLUTIONS, INC. 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE F&J FERNANDEZ CONTRACTING 59 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Davis Health 10,481 FTE
CITY-NEAR Employment Development Department 8,494 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 451 5,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 485 5,500 FTE
NAT-TCR Kolbe & Kolbe - Manawa 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Bradley Caldwell, Inc. 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Dymax Oligomers & Coatings LLC 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR GFL Environmental USA Inc. - Wayne, MI 4.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Stinger Bridge & Iron-CALIFORNIA 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Progro Partners of Colorado 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Electric 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Parks and Recreation Department 59 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: 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.