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

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville

Edwardsville, IL · ~51 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
13.6
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville runs at 358% 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.

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville: 13.6 TCR = 358% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville safety composite

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 11%), 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

23/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 13.61 per 100 workers

Safer than 16% of industry peers

DART rate
F 11.71 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% 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

−4.0

2016→2019

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville injury rate improved

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville's TCR fell 4.0 from 18.6 in 2016 to 14.6 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2016 at 18.6 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.86× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=18.6 · 2017=7.6 · 2019=14.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Edwardsville, IL ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 13.6 · 358% of ind

  • DART 11.7 DART
  • RANK #187/217
  • PHOTO Bentley Commons at P…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~51 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bentley Commons at Paragon Village (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cedarhurst of Edwardsville averages 13.6 TCR (358% 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 2026-08-25

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville TCR series: 2016=18.6 · 2017=7.6 · 2019=14.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Cedarhurst of Edwardsville falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 16% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #187 safest of 217 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Illinois.

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville (51 employees, TCR 13.6) 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 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Cedarhurst of Edwardsville
Cedarhurst of Edwardsville (51 employees, TCR 13.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Cedarhurst of Edwardsville 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
2019 14.6 11.7 5 0 0
2017 7.6 5.0 3 0 0
2016 18.6 10.6 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · IL · Edwardsville

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 105 employers in Edwardsville, IL · 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 Bentley Commons at Paragon Village 13.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Compass on the Bay 13.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Eden Heights of Eden 13.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ivy Park at Wood Ranch 13.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Larch Farm 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE CDG 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE Prince Minerals LLC - QUI 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE AMEREN ILLINOIS - Quincy 51 FTE
CITY-NEAR NAIC2 1,167 FTE
CITY-NEAR J.F. Electric, Incorporated 989 FTE
CITY-NEAR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : STL4 905 FTE
CITY-NEAR Madison County Government 886 FTE
NAT-TCR Pacific Supply Las Vegas 13.6 TCR
NAT-TCR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : CLE2 13.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Central Freight Lines, Inc. - Valdosta 13.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Gaston SEFF 13.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Plascore Inc (Aramid) 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE Colonial Terminals - Plant 2 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE Deer Park Headquarters 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE #57 Art Van Traverse City 51 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: 2019, 2017, 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.