Intellectual and developmental disability facilities (e.g., homes, hospitals, intermediate care facilities), residential · Wisconsin

Chileda

La Crosse, WI · ~179 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
20.8
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Chileda runs at 546% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Intellectual and developmental disability facilities (e.g., homes, hospitals, intermediate care facilities), residential workplace, earning a grade F.

Chileda: 20.8 TCR = 546% of Intellectual and developmental disability facilities (e.g., homes, hospitals, intermediate care facilities), residential BLS 3.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Chileda safety composite

Chileda scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 1%), 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

14/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 20.75 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
F 35.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 1% 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

Chileda: 0.0 → 41.5 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 41.5 TCR · DART/TCR 1.73× in 2024

Chileda's TCR rose 41.5 from 0.0 in 2023 to 41.5 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.73× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623210 · La Crosse, WI ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 20.8 · 546% of ind

  • DART 35.8 DART
  • RANK #38/39
  • PHOTO Chestnut Hill Drive
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 110 inj
  • SIZE ~179 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Chestnut Hill Drive (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Chileda in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Chileda averages 20.8 TCR (546% of the Intellectual and developmental disability facilities (e.g., homes, hospitals, intermediate care facilities), residential BLS benchmark).

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

Chileda TCR series: 2023=0 · 2024=41.5 · BLS 3.8

Where Chileda falls in its industry

2,261 Intellectual and developmental establishments

Safer than 4% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Wisconsin alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #38 safest of 39 Intellectual and developmental employers in Wisconsin.

Chileda (179 employees, TCR 20.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 0200400600 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Chileda
Chileda (179 employees, TCR 20.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 5.8

Chileda has more employees than the Intellectual and developmental disabilit median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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 41.5 35.8 110 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623210 · WI · La Crosse

2,261 Intellectual and developmental disability facilities (e.g., homes, hospitals, intermediate care facilities), residential employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,834 rated employers in Wisconsin with headcount on file · 188 employers in La Crosse, WI · 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 Chestnut Hill Drive 20.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR CFL-ASPIR-CENTER FOR LEARNING 20.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hav-It Services - North Group Home 20.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR IO - Frankfort 20.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Natural Beauty Growers, LLC - Denmark WI 179 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oak Creek Power Plant 179 FTE
STATE-SIZE Renewal by Andersen South 179 FTE
STATE-SIZE AMSOIL Center 179 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gundersen Lutheran Medical Center 3,712 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mayo Clinic Health System-Franciscan Healthcare Inc 2,329 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gundersen Clinic, Ltd. 2,127 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gundersen - La Crosse Clinic 1,739 FTE
NAT-TCR Waterhouse Ridge Memory Care 20.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Oconee Health and Rehabilitation 20.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Bdl-Ground Ops 20.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Town of Enfield Division of Buildings and Grounds 20.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Buckman Laboratories, International, Inc. 179 FTE
NAT-SIZE EB Care at Farmingville 179 FTE
NAT-SIZE Seemann Composites, LLC 179 FTE
NAT-SIZE Jabil Packaging Solutions 179 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.