For-sale builders (i.e., building on own land, for sale), residential · South Carolina

Charleston Division

Charleston, SC · ~29 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.4
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Charleston Division runs at 63% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical For-sale builders (i.e., building on own land, for sale), residential workplace, earning a grade B.

Charleston Division: 2.4 TCR = 63% of For-sale builders (i.e., building on own land, for sale), residential BLS 3.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Charleston Division safety composite

Charleston Division scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 33%), 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

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.38 per 100 workers

Safer than 33% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Charleston Division: 0.0 → 4.6 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 12.1 TCR · DART/TCR 0× in 2024

Charleston Division's TCR rose 4.6 from 0.0 in 2018 to 4.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 12.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236117 · Charleston, SC AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.4 · 63% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/11
  • PHOTO Columbia Division
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~29 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Columbia Division (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Charleston Division in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Charleston Division averages 2.4 TCR (63% of the For-sale builders (i.e., building on own land, for sale), residential BLS benchmark).

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

Charleston Division TCR series: 2018=0 · 2019=0 · 2020=12.1 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=4.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Charleston Division falls in its industry

341 For-sale builders (i.e., build establishments

Safer than 33% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 11 For-sale builders (i.e., build employers in South Carolina.

Charleston Division (29 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 79 employees and a TCR of 1.7 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 02004006008001,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Charleston Division
Charleston Division (29 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 79 employees and a TCR of 1.7

Charleston Division has fewer employees than the For-sale builders (i.e., building on own median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.7. 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 4.6 0.0 1 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 12.1 12.1 2 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236117 · SC · Charleston

341 For-sale builders (i.e., building on own land, for sale), residential employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 341 employers in Charleston, SC · 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 Columbia Division 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR SCM Construction Mgmt Services 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aspen View Homes Longmont 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Curtis Homes LLC 2.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE MT PLEASANT CREW QUARTERS 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ni Pacolet Milliken 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE 32328 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mundy Maintenance, Services and Operations LLC Job #32311 29 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University Hospital Authority 8,204 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University of South Carolina 5,881 FTE
CITY-NEAR SC-03 4,525 FTE
CITY-NEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT DIVISION 1,790 FTE
NAT-TCR Oregon 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Bergelectric Corp. TX 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Leed Selling Tools 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Columbus Foam Products 2.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Le Bleu Corporation 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE 16 - Halifax 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ballard Truss LLC Snowflake 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Javin, Inc 29 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.