Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g., government office cafeterias, hospital cafeterias, school cafeterias) · Arizona

ASPC Eyman

Florence, AZ · ~42 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.4
Avg TCR
3.0
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

ASPC Eyman runs at 148% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g., government office cafeterias, hospital cafeterias, school cafeterias) workplace, earning a grade D.

ASPC Eyman: 4.4 TCR = 148% of Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g., government office cafeterias, hospital cafeterias, school cafeterias) BLS 3.0 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

ASPC Eyman safety composite

ASPC Eyman scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 70% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 38%), 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).

D

52/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 4.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 38% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 70% 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

−4.7

2016→2023

ASPC Eyman injury rate improved

ASPC Eyman's TCR fell 4.7 from 4.7 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 13.4 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.7 · 2017=6.2 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=5.5 · 2020=5.7 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=13.4 · 2023=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 722310 · Florence, AZ ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.4 · 148% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #89/152
  • PHOTO SODEXO AT BLOOMBERG …
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 13 inj
  • SIZE ~42 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SODEXO AT BLOOMBERG 120 PARK CATERING (0.0 TCR gap)

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

ASPC Eyman in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows ASPC Eyman averages 4.4 TCR (148% of the Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g., government office cafeterias, hospital cafeterias, school cafeterias) BLS benchmark).

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

ASPC Eyman TCR series: 2016=4.7 · 2017=6.2 · 2018=0 · 2019=5.5 · 2020=5.7 · 2021=0 · 2022=13.4 · 2023=0 · BLS 3.0

Where ASPC Eyman falls in its industry

6,952 Cafeteria food services contra establishments

Safer than 38% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arizona alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #89 safest of 152 Cafeteria food services contra employers in Arizona.

ASPC Eyman (42 employees, TCR 4.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate ASPC Eyman
ASPC Eyman (42 employees, TCR 4.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 employees and a TCR of 3.5

ASPC Eyman has fewer employees than the Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g median and a higher 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
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 13.4 0.0 4 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 5.7 0.0 2 0 0
2019 5.5 0.0 2 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 6.2 0.0 3 0 0
2016 4.7 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

722310 · AZ · Florence

6,952 Cafeteria food services contractors (e.g., government office cafeterias, hospital cafeterias, school cafeterias) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 9,594 rated employers in Arizona with headcount on file · 45 employers in Florence, AZ · 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 SODEXO AT BLOOMBERG 120 PARK CATERING 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR SODEXO AT ADAMS STATE UNIVERSITY 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Grounds for Sculpture 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR LIFE U SOCRATES 4.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Verano CPG Winslow 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE 260_450 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Flagstaff Maintenance North 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Flagstaff Forestry/IS 42 FTE
CITY-NEAR AZ Corrections-Eyman 1,103 FTE
CITY-NEAR ASPC-Eyman 1,054 FTE
CITY-NEAR Eyman 1,020 FTE
CITY-NEAR CENTRAL ARIZONA FLORENCE CORRE 933 FTE
NAT-TCR Associated Spring Milwaukee Division 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Knox Lee 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR First Student 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Caboy - Boyle Trailer Shop (Pac Reg) 4.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Andreola Terrazzo & Restoration, Inc 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Stewart & Stevenson - San Antonio Branch 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Roselawn Gardens LLC 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Antique Brick and Block 42 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: 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.