Health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers and clinics · Minnesota

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601

Anoka, MN · ~147 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.7
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 runs at 71% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers and clinics workplace, earning a grade B.

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601: 2.7 TCR = 71% of Health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers and clinics BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 safety composite

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 65% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 47%), 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

55/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.7 per 100 workers

Safer than 65% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.74 per 100 workers

Safer than 47% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

−2.6

2017→2021

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 injury rate improved

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601's TCR fell 2.6 from 4.8 in 2017 to 2.2 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2017 at 4.8 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.27× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.8 · 2018=2.3 · 2020=1.4 · 2021=2.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 621491 · Anoka, MN AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.7 · 71% of ind

  • DART 0.7 DART
  • RANK #11/25
  • PHOTO CENTRO DE SALUD INTE…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~147 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: CENTRO DE SALUD INTEGRAL EN OROCOVIS (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 averages 2.7 TCR (71% of the Health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers and clinics BLS benchmark).

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

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 TCR series: 2017=4.8 · 2018=2.3 · 2020=1.4 · 2021=2.2 · BLS 3.8

Where Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 falls in its industry

78 Health maintenance organizatio establishments

Safer than 65% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 25 Health maintenance organizatio employers in Minnesota.

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 (147 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 137 employees and a TCR of 3.6 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601
Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 (147 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 137 employees and a TCR of 3.6

Anoka RiverWay Clinic 601 has more employees than the Health maintenance organization (HMO) me median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.6. 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 2.2 0.7 3 0 0
2020 1.4 0.0 2 0 0
2018 2.3 0.0 3 0 0
2017 4.8 0.0 6 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

621491 · MN · Anoka

78 Health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers and clinics employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 100 employers in Anoka, MN · 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 CENTRO DE SALUD INTEGRAL EN OROCOVIS 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Dignity Health Medical Group Nevada 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aspenwood Senior Living 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR HSC 2.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Michels Gas Distribution- Lakeville, MN 147 FTE
STATE-SIZE Master Technology Group 147 FTE
STATE-SIZE DFA-KMP - FARMINGTON MN 147 FTE
STATE-SIZE 5050 Coborn's Bake Shoppe 147 FTE
CITY-NEAR Federal Cartridge Company 1,582 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hoffman Enclosures Inc 1,468 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hoffman Industries, LLC 1,444 FTE
CITY-NEAR Educational Service Center 1,095 FTE
NAT-TCR Concepts In Cabinetry 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Main Office 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 42361c - Toms River 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Foodservice : DOWNINGTOWN 2.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Environment Control Visalia 147 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gold Metal Recyclers LTD 147 FTE
NAT-SIZE MidMichigan Medical Center-Gladwin 147 FTE
NAT-SIZE Southwark Metal - Nebraska Divison 147 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, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.