Beef produced in slaughtering plants · California

Central Valley Meat Company

Hanford, CA · ~844 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
11.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Central Valley Meat Company runs at 357% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Beef produced in slaughtering plants workplace, earning a grade F.

Central Valley Meat Company: 11.8 TCR = 357% of Beef produced in slaughtering plants BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Central Valley Meat Company safety composite

Central Valley Meat Company scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 55% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 15%), 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

27/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 11.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 15% of industry peers

DART rate
F 6.16 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% of industry peers

Fatalities
C 0

Safer than 55% 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

−0.5

2019→2024

Central Valley Meat Company injury rate improved

Central Valley Meat Company's TCR fell 0.5 from 9.6 in 2019 to 9.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 20.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.52× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=9.6 · 2021=20.0 · 2022=11.1 · 2023=9.1 · 2024=9.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311611 · Hanford, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 11.8 · 357% of ind

  • DART 6.2 DART
  • RANK #9/14
  • PHOTO Marcho Farms, Inc
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 399 inj
  • SIZE ~844 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Marcho Farms, Inc (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Central Valley Meat Company in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Central Valley Meat Company averages 11.8 TCR (357% of the Beef produced in slaughtering plants BLS benchmark).

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

Central Valley Meat Company TCR series: 2019=9.6 · 2021=20 · 2022=11.1 · 2023=9.1 · 2024=9.1 · BLS 3.3

Where Central Valley Meat Company falls in its industry

212 Beef produced in slaughtering establishments

Safer than 15% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #9 safest of 14 Beef produced in slaughtering employers in California.

Central Valley Meat Company (844 employees, TCR 11.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 297 employees and a TCR of 5.3 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 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Central Valley Meat Company
Central Valley Meat Company (844 employees, TCR 11.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 297 employees and a TCR of 5.3

Central Valley Meat Company has more employees than the Beef produced in slaughtering plants median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.3. 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 9.1 6.2 71 7 0
2023 9.1 6.0 88 3 0
2022 11.1 8.4 96 7 0
2021 20.0 17.6 70 123 0
2019 9.6 7.1 74 21 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311611 · CA · Hanford

212 Beef produced in slaughtering plants employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 118 employers in Hanford, 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 Marcho Farms, Inc 11.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lamb & Veal, Maintenance 11.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Pioneer Meats, Inc. 11.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Waterloo Pork Plant 12.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - HLA6 844 FTE
STATE-SIZE Crestwood Behavioral Health 844 FTE
STATE-SIZE MIS 845 FTE
STATE-SIZE Raytheon_Goleta_CA_RVS 843 FTE
CITY-NEAR Daniel C. Salas Harvesting Inc. 2,932 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hanford Community Hospital 1,849 FTE
CITY-NEAR 9292-AHHF001 - HOSPITAL 1,153 FTE
CITY-NEAR A.M. AG ENTERPRISE, INC. 976 FTE
NAT-TCR Applequist Mfg, Inc. 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Freightliner of Altoona 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Avantara Long Grove 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Ware Butler Building Supply - Waterville 11.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - BNA8 844 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pritchard Sports and Entertainment Group, LLC 844 FTE
NAT-SIZE Grand Rapids Operations 844 FTE
NAT-SIZE Killington/Pico Ski Resort Partners LLC. 844 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, 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.