Fencing and fence gates made from purchased wire · Texas

CE Shepherd Sterling Street

Houston, TX · ~81 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

CE Shepherd Sterling Street runs at 48% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Fencing and fence gates made from purchased wire workplace, earning a grade A.

CE Shepherd Sterling Street: 1.6 TCR = 48% of Fencing and fence gates made from purchased wire BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

CE Shepherd Sterling Street safety composite

CE Shepherd Sterling Street scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 84% 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

74/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.59 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% 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%).

CE Shepherd Sterling Street held a steady TCR band

CE Shepherd Sterling Street's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 3.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=0.0 · 2018=3.4 · 2019=3.5 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=2.1 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332618 · Houston, TX AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.6 · 48% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #8/29
  • PHOTO Cablofil
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 10 inj
  • SIZE ~81 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Cablofil (0.0 TCR gap)

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

CE Shepherd Sterling Street in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows CE Shepherd Sterling Street averages 1.6 TCR (48% of the Fencing and fence gates made from purchased wire BLS benchmark).

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

CE Shepherd Sterling Street TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=3.4 · 2019=3.5 · 2020=0 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=2.1 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where CE Shepherd Sterling Street falls in its industry

270 Fencing and fence gates made f establishments

Safer than 84% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #8 safest of 29 Fencing and fence gates made f employers in Texas.

CE Shepherd Sterling Street (81 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.7 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 0100200300400500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate CE Shepherd Sterling Street
CE Shepherd Sterling Street (81 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.7

CE Shepherd Sterling Street has more employees than the Fencing and fence gates made from purcha median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.7. 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 2 0 0
2022 1.2 1.2 1 0 0
2021 2.4 2.4 2 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 3.5 2.4 3 0 0
2018 3.4 3.4 2 1 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332618 · TX · Houston

270 Fencing and fence gates made from purchased wire employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 5,116 employers in Houston, TX · 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 Cablofil 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jacksonville 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bishop Lifting Products - Houston 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Heraeus Medical Components Caribe Inc 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Kraken Oil & Gas 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Total Frac Solutions 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE ARLINGTON SERVICE CENTER 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Karnes Electric Cooperative, Inc. 81 FTE
CITY-NEAR IAH IAH 11,560 FTE
CITY-NEAR IAH - Airport United Airlines Offices 10,239 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6925-IAH 9,442 FTE
CITY-NEAR Houston Methodist Hospital Texas Medical Center 8,873 FTE
NAT-TCR Southeastern Dock Supply, LLC 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Otis Elevator Company-Milwaukee 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Garden City Park 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Jn Trucking Inc. 1.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Woodbridge Place 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Morrisville NC 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Specialized Towing 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dyno Nobel 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.