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

Cadence Mooresville

Scottsdale, AZ · ~71 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
34.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cadence Mooresville runs at 919% 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.

Cadence Mooresville: 34.9 TCR = 919% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cadence Mooresville safety composite

Cadence Mooresville scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 0%), 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

14/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 34.93 per 100 workers

Safer than 0% of industry peers

DART rate
F 19.82 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% 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

−1.3

2020→2022

Cadence Mooresville injury rate improved

Cadence Mooresville's TCR fell 1.3 from 38.1 in 2020 to 36.8 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2020 at 38.1 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.57× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2020=38.1 · 2021=29.9 · 2022=36.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Scottsdale, AZ ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 34.9 · 919% of ind

  • DART 19.8 DART
  • RANK #173/173
  • PHOTO Carlton Senior Livin…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 28 inj
  • SIZE ~71 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Carlton Senior Living Davis (5.0 TCR gap)

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

Cadence Mooresville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cadence Mooresville averages 34.9 TCR (919% 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 2026-09-26

Cadence Mooresville TCR series: 2020=38.1 · 2021=29.9 · 2022=36.8 · BLS 3.8

Where Cadence Mooresville falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 0% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arizona alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #173 safest of 173 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Arizona.

Cadence Mooresville (71 employees, TCR 34.9) 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 010203040 Average employees Total Case Rate Cadence Mooresville
Cadence Mooresville (71 employees, TCR 34.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Cadence Mooresville 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
2022 36.8 19.8 13 0 0
2021 29.9 0.0 10 0 0
2020 38.1 36.5 5 19 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · AZ · Scottsdale

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 9,594 rated employers in Arizona with headcount on file · 531 employers in Scottsdale, 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 Carlton Senior Living Davis 29.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cornerstone Residence of Fosston 29.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Rose Valley Scappoose 29.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Chandler Place Independent Living 29.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sky Ridge 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Trader Joe's 0091 Tempe 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Haven of Cottonwood, LLC 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE 036375-PHX-CAPITOL STA 71 FTE
CITY-NEAR Educational Services LLC 6,575 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Scottsdale 4,077 FTE
CITY-NEAR SHEA MEDICAL CTR CAMPUS 2,881 FTE
CITY-NEAR SUPPORT SERVICES CAMPUS 2,800 FTE
NAT-TCR Rockland Facility 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 048 Juvenile Detention Center 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Governor Juan F. Luis Hospital and Medical Center 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Kemper Moving Systems 30.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Tri County Pallet 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE American Fire Protection LLC 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE London Health and Rehab 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cenveo Chicopee 71 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: 2022, 2021, 2020. 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.