Job training, vocational rehabilitation or habilitation · Oregon

Cedar Hills Store

Beaverton, OR · ~47 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
7.3
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cedar Hills Store runs at 192% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Job training, vocational rehabilitation or habilitation workplace, earning a grade D.

Cedar Hills Store: 7.3 TCR = 192% of Job training, vocational rehabilitation or habilitation BLS 3.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cedar Hills Store safety composite

Cedar Hills Store scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 27%), 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

33/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.29 per 100 workers

Safer than 27% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.28 per 100 workers

Safer than 27% 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

−20.2

2016→2023

Cedar Hills Store injury rate improved

Cedar Hills Store's TCR fell 20.2 from 25.4 in 2016 to 5.3 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2016 at 25.4 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.72× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=25.4 · 2018=9.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=8.8 · 2021=2.5 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=5.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 624310 · Beaverton, OR ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 7.3 · 192% of ind

  • DART 5.3 DART
  • RANK #23/67
  • PHOTO Anoka Semi-Independe…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 21 inj
  • SIZE ~47 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Anoka Semi-Independent Living Services and Day Training and Habilitation (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Cedar Hills Store in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cedar Hills Store averages 7.3 TCR (192% of the Job training, vocational rehabilitation or habilitation BLS benchmark).

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

Cedar Hills Store TCR series: 2016=25.4 · 2018=9 · 2019=0 · 2020=8.8 · 2021=2.5 · 2022=0 · 2023=5.3 · BLS 3.8

Where Cedar Hills Store falls in its industry

1,455 Job training, vocational rehab establishments

Safer than 27% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Oregon alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #23 safest of 67 Job training, vocational rehab employers in Oregon.

Cedar Hills Store (47 employees, TCR 7.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 4.6 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 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,000 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Cedar Hills Store
Cedar Hills Store (47 employees, TCR 7.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 4.6

Cedar Hills Store has fewer employees than the Job training, vocational rehabilitation median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.6. 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
2023 5.3 5.3 2 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 2.5 2.5 1 0 0
2020 8.8 8.8 3 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 9.0 6.8 4 0 0
2016 25.4 16.2 11 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

624310 · OR · Beaverton

1,455 Job training, vocational rehabilitation or habilitation employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 8,031 rated employers in Oregon with headcount on file · 240 employers in Beaverton, OR · 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 Anoka Semi-Independent Living Services and Day Training and Habilitation 7.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR 6443-482167 7.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Work Center 7.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR So Goodwill Klamath Falls 7.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE 00463 ROSEBURG CUST SVC CNTR 47 FTE
STATE-SIZE Salem Electric 47 FTE
STATE-SIZE Northern Operations Center 47 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pahlisch Commercial Inc 47 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nike World Headquarters 14,796 FTE
CITY-NEAR 004-Nike Air Manufacturing Oregon 1,585 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tailwind (IHM - Beaverton) 1,170 FTE
CITY-NEAR Analog Devices 907 FTE
NAT-TCR The Heritage Shadyside 7.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Certified, Inc. 7.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Chinook Fire Protection Inc 7.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Cape Associates Eastham office 7.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Foam Fabricators Inc. 47 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lakin Tire West - CO 47 FTE
NAT-SIZE Unit #2997 47 FTE
NAT-SIZE Unit #2841 47 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, 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.