Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services · North Carolina

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS)

Charlotte, NC · ~41 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.1
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) runs at 42% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services workplace, earning a grade A.

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS): 1.1 TCR = 42% of Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services BLS 2.6 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) safety composite

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 71% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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).

C

65/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.1 per 100 workers

Safer than 71% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% 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

−3.0

2016→2020

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) injury rate improved

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS)'s TCR fell 3.0 from 3.0 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2016 at 3.0 TCR. In 2020, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.0 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=2.5 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561621 · Charlotte, NC AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.1 · 42% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #3/7
  • PHOTO Brighton, MI (SSS, C…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~41 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Brighton, MI (SSS, CSS) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) averages 1.1 TCR (42% of the Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services BLS benchmark).

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

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) TCR series: 2016=3 · 2017=0 · 2018=2.5 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · BLS 2.6

Where Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) falls in its industry

161 Security alarm systems sales c establishments

Safer than 71% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 7 Security alarm systems sales c employers in North Carolina.

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) (41 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 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 0100200300400500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS)
Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) (41 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 1.7

Charlotte, NC (SSS, CSS) has fewer employees than the Security alarm systems sales combined wi median and a lower 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
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 2.5 2.5 1 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 3.0 3.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561621 · NC · Charlotte

161 Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 2,058 employers in Charlotte, NC · 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 Brighton, MI (SSS, CSS) 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Tucker FS (SSS, CSS) 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Plymouth FS (SSS, CSS) 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lorton FS (SSS, CSS) 1.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Jeff Barnes LLC 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sandhill Turf 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lewiston NC Operation 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hendersonville Operations Center 41 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1101-Carolinas Medical Center (1101) 8,444 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0001-Carolinas Medical Center 8,032 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4795-AA-CLT-CHARLOTTE-CLT-TRML 7,295 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center 4,973 FTE
NAT-TCR Oaktree Healthcare 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Roses 532 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR zulily 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Evolent Health LLC Bedford 1.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Schumacher Electric Corporation - Dallas 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Oerlikon Balzers Coating USA Inc Wixom 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Aacres Ca LLC - Sacramento 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE FB - Federal Building 41 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: 2020, 2019, 2018, 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.