Intravenous (IV) solution preparations manufacturing · California

CAPS Santa Fe Springs

Santa Fe Springs, CA · ~70 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

CAPS Santa Fe Springs runs at 37% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Intravenous (IV) solution preparations manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

CAPS Santa Fe Springs: 1.2 TCR = 37% of Intravenous (IV) solution preparations manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

CAPS Santa Fe Springs safety composite

CAPS Santa Fe Springs scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 83% 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

67/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.21 per 100 workers

Safer than 63% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 83% 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

−2.2

2017→2024

CAPS Santa Fe Springs injury rate improved

CAPS Santa Fe Springs's TCR fell 2.2 from 2.2 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 2.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.2 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=2.1 · 2020=2.1 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=2.1 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325412 · Santa Fe Springs, CA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.2 · 37% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #20/79
  • PHOTO Golden State Medical…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~70 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Golden State Medical Supply (0.0 TCR gap)

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

CAPS Santa Fe Springs in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows CAPS Santa Fe Springs averages 1.2 TCR (37% of the Intravenous (IV) solution preparations manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

CAPS Santa Fe Springs TCR series: 2017=2.2 · 2018=0 · 2019=2.1 · 2020=2.1 · 2022=0 · 2023=2.1 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where CAPS Santa Fe Springs falls in its industry

855 Intravenous (IV) solution prep establishments

Safer than 63% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #20 safest of 79 Intravenous (IV) solution prep employers in California.

CAPS Santa Fe Springs (70 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 171 employees and a TCR of 1.6 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 CAPS Santa Fe Springs
CAPS Santa Fe Springs (70 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 171 employees and a TCR of 1.6

CAPS Santa Fe Springs has fewer employees than the Intravenous (IV) solution preparations m median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.6. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 2.1 2.1 1 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 2.1 2.1 1 0 0
2019 2.1 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 2.2 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325412 · CA · Santa Fe Springs

855 Intravenous (IV) solution preparations manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 310 employers in Santa Fe Springs, 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 Golden State Medical Supply 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nandino BUilding 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Piramal Pharma Solutions R&D and Manufacturing 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ajinomoto Althea 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Heritage Land Company 70 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ceballos Ag Services, Inc. 70 FTE
STATE-SIZE NRTHN 70 FTE
STATE-SIZE EW Merritt Farms 70 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 423 3,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. 1,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI 1,179 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vans Distribution Center - SFS 757 FTE
NAT-TCR Electrotech Service Equipment Corp 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR MIA-145 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR PEPRO 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR RH Construction of Tennessee LLC 1.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lci - 048 70 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Rice-Tinsley Corporation 70 FTE
NAT-SIZE Stericycle - Sturtevant,WI 70 FTE
NAT-SIZE Grupo Logistics Inc. 70 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, 2020, 2019, 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.