Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities · West Virginia

Cedar Grove Assisted Living

Parkersburg, WV · ~39 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
13.0
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cedar Grove Assisted Living runs at 341% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Cedar Grove Assisted Living: 13.0 TCR = 341% of Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cedar Grove Assisted Living safety composite

Cedar Grove Assisted Living scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 17%), 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

36/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 12.97 per 100 workers

Safer than 17% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.75 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

−8.8

2019→2024

Cedar Grove Assisted Living injury rate improved

Cedar Grove Assisted Living's TCR fell 8.8 from 12.6 in 2019 to 3.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 24.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.29× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=12.6 · 2020=11.0 · 2021=24.5 · 2024=3.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Parkersburg, WV ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 13.0 · 341% of ind

  • DART 3.8 DART
  • RANK #19/21
  • PHOTO Post Falls OPS LLC
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~39 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Post Falls OPS LLC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Cedar Grove Assisted Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cedar Grove Assisted Living averages 13.0 TCR (341% of the Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Cedar Grove Assisted Living TCR series: 2019=12.6 · 2020=11 · 2021=24.5 · 2024=3.8 · BLS 3.8

Where Cedar Grove Assisted Living falls in its industry

4,127 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 17% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to West Virginia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #19 safest of 21 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in West Virginia.

Cedar Grove Assisted Living (39 employees, TCR 13.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Cedar Grove Assisted Living
Cedar Grove Assisted Living (39 employees, TCR 13.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Cedar Grove Assisted Living has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities with on-site median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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 3.8 3.8 1 0 0
2021 24.5 24.5 1 6 0
2020 11.0 11.0 1 3 0
2019 12.6 5.0 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · WV · Parkersburg

4,127 Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 2,269 rated employers in West Virginia with headcount on file · 79 employers in Parkersburg, WV · 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 Post Falls OPS LLC 13.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Frisco Memory Care, LLC 13.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Pearl at Boulder Creek 13.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Arbor at Bremerton 13.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Milton Office and Service Center 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE MSC Construction, Inc. 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE North American Services Group - Weirton 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kessel Lumber Products 39 FTE
CITY-NEAR Camden Clark Memorial Hospital 2,014 FTE
CITY-NEAR Wincore Window Company LLC 434 FTE
CITY-NEAR Wincore Windows & Doors 378 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2823 333 FTE
NAT-TCR 211 Everett 13.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Life Care Center of Sierra Vista 13.0 TCR
NAT-TCR The Mcguire Group 13.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Henderson 13.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Avports LLC Teterboro Airport 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Carson Terminal 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE D.W. Mack Co., Inc. 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Jit Tool & Die, Inc 39 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, 2021, 2020, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.