Activity centers for disabled persons, the elderly, and persons diagnosed with intellectual and developmental disabilities · Minnesota

Chrestomathy Center

Minneapolis, MN · ~35 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
4.3
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Chrestomathy Center runs at 112% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Activity centers for disabled persons, the elderly, and persons diagnosed with intellectual and developmental disabilities workplace, earning a grade C.

Chrestomathy Center: 4.3 TCR = 112% of Activity centers for disabled persons, the elderly, and persons diagnosed with intellectual and developmental disabilities BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Chrestomathy Center safety composite

Chrestomathy Center scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

62/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 4.27 per 100 workers

Safer than 52% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

−5.2

2017→2020

Chrestomathy Center injury rate improved

Chrestomathy Center's TCR fell 5.2 from 5.2 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2018 at 6.2 TCR. In 2020, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=5.2 · 2018=6.2 · 2019=5.8 · 2020=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 624120 · Minneapolis, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 4.3 · 112% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #22/44
  • PHOTO Orland DT- RITA
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~35 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Orland DT- RITA (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Chrestomathy Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Chrestomathy Center averages 4.3 TCR (112% of the Activity centers for disabled persons, the elderly, and persons diagnosed with intellectual and developmental disabilities BLS benchmark).

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

Chrestomathy Center TCR series: 2017=5.2 · 2018=6.2 · 2019=5.8 · 2020=0 · BLS 3.8

Where Chrestomathy Center falls in its industry

1,320 Activity centers for disabled establishments

Safer than 52% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #22 safest of 44 Activity centers for disabled employers in Minnesota.

Chrestomathy Center (35 employees, TCR 4.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 72 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 05001,0001,5002,0002,500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Chrestomathy Center
Chrestomathy Center (35 employees, TCR 4.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 72 employees and a TCR of 4.5

Chrestomathy Center has fewer employees than the Activity centers for disabled persons, t median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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 5.8 5.8 2 0 0
2018 6.2 6.2 2 0 0
2017 5.2 2.6 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

624120 · MN · Minneapolis

1,320 Activity centers for disabled persons, the elderly, and persons diagnosed with intellectual and developmental disabilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 1,321 employers in Minneapolis, MN · 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 Orland DT- RITA 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Social Vocational Services 263 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR 180 - 182 North St. 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Community Options Inc Schuylkill County PA 4.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Dollymount 35 FTE
STATE-SIZE Scotch Prairie Farms LLC 35 FTE
STATE-SIZE Genex Farm Systems Melrose 35 FTE
STATE-SIZE Black Dog Power Plant 35 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Twin Cities 22,522 FTE
CITY-NEAR MN950 MN TELECOMMUTER 12,021 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0501 - City Center 8,459 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hennepin County Medical Center 7,030 FTE
NAT-TCR Fort Wayne 30 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Roofmasters Hays Location 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Meijer Store 250 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Syracuse Store - 01 4.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Cheshire Public Works (includes Parks and Waste Water) 35 FTE
NAT-SIZE JK Vineyards 35 FTE
NAT-SIZE JLG - Riverside 35 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bridgecreek Memory Care 35 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.