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

Aegis of Granada Hills

Granada Hills, CA · ~81 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
20.6
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Aegis of Granada Hills runs at 541% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Aegis of Granada Hills: 20.6 TCR = 541% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Aegis of Granada Hills safety composite

Aegis of Granada Hills scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 4%), 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).

F

20/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 20.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
F 9.76 per 100 workers

Safer than 16% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Aegis of Granada Hills: 7.9 → 12.6 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 53.8 TCR · DART/TCR 0.47× in 2024

Aegis of Granada Hills's TCR rose 4.6 from 7.9 in 2016 to 12.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 53.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.47× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Granada Hills, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 20.6 · 541% of ind

  • DART 9.8 DART
  • RANK #592/635
  • PHOTO Azalea Trails
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 55 inj
  • SIZE ~81 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Azalea Trails (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Aegis of Granada Hills in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Aegis of Granada Hills averages 20.6 TCR (541% 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

Aegis of Granada Hills TCR series: 2016=7.9 · 2017=12.8 · 2018=12.9 · 2019=8.3 · 2020=30.6 · 2021=40.2 · 2022=53.8 · 2023=39.3 · 2024=12.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Aegis of Granada Hills falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 4% 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 #592 safest of 635 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in California.

Aegis of Granada Hills (81 employees, TCR 20.6) 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 Aegis of Granada Hills
Aegis of Granada Hills (81 employees, TCR 20.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Aegis of Granada Hills has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher 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 12.6 9.8 6 3 0
2023 39.3 37.9 8 20 0
2022 53.8 53.8 1 36 0
2021 40.2 35.9 5 23 0
2020 30.6 29.3 6 18 0
2019 8.3 4.2 6 0 0
2018 12.9 10.0 9 0 0
2017 12.8 11.3 9 0 0
2016 7.9 6.3 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · CA · Granada Hills

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 · 34 employers in Granada Hills, 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 Azalea Trails 20.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Copperleaf Memory Care of Schofield 20.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Foulk Manor South 20.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Canyon Creek 20.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Allied Potato Inc. 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE STS Ranch LLC 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE C. R CRAIN AND SONS, INC 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Miramar 81 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 457 2,621 FTE
CITY-NEAR Granada Hills Charter 540 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2329 - Granada Hills 292 FTE
CITY-NEAR MWL Solutions Inc 158 FTE
NAT-TCR Atlanta PDC 20.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Lakefield Veterinary Group - 181 20.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Stateline Medical Center 20.6 TCR
NAT-TCR The Grand Healthcare 20.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Aegis of Issaquah 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Prime Touch Services 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Whitesell Corporation - Avalon 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Whitesell Corporation - Gargis Lane 81 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, 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.