Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building · California

City Gardens

San Francisco, CA · ~22 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.4
Avg TCR
2.9
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

City Gardens runs at 256% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building workplace, earning a grade F.

City Gardens: 7.4 TCR = 256% of Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building BLS 2.9 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

City Gardens safety composite

City Gardens scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 2%), 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

18/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.43 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% of industry peers

DART rate
F 11.15 per 100 workers

Safer than 2% 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%).

Rising injury rate

City Gardens: 0.0 → 14.9 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 14.9 TCR · DART/TCR 1.5× in 2019

City Gardens's TCR rose 14.9 from 0.0 in 2018 to 14.9 in 2019. In 2019, DART was 1.5× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236220 · San Francisco, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 7.4 · 256% of ind

  • DART 11.2 DART
  • RANK #426/486
  • PHOTO Macon County Animal …
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~22 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Macon County Animal Control (0.0 TCR gap)

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

City Gardens in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows City Gardens averages 7.4 TCR (256% of the Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building BLS benchmark).

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

City Gardens TCR series: 2018=0 · 2019=14.9 · BLS 2.9

Where City Gardens falls in its industry

4,692 Addition, alteration and renov establishments

Safer than 11% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #426 safest of 486 Addition, alteration and renov employers in California.

City Gardens (22 employees, TCR 7.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.3 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 0100200300400500 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate City Gardens
City Gardens (22 employees, TCR 7.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.3

City Gardens has fewer employees than the Addition, alteration and renovation for- median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.3. 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
2019 14.9 11.2 4 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236220 · CA · San Francisco

4,692 Addition, alteration and renovation for-sale builders, commercial and institutional building employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 1,144 employers in San Francisco, 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 Macon County Animal Control 7.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Desco Professional Builders, INC 7.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Haren & Laughlin Construction Co., Inc. 7.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ferguson Construction Company - Dayton 7.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE LaGrande Farms 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE Del Carlo Farms, Inc. 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE Linda Vista Farms 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE MOUNTAIN VIEW FARM SHOP 22 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC San Francisco 18,070 FTE
CITY-NEAR DoorDash, Inc. 12,430 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC San Francisco Health 12,262 FTE
CITY-NEAR SFO - Airport United Airlines Offices 11,622 FTE
NAT-TCR The D. S. Brown Company / SEP Inc. 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Scott Construction Inc. 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Terminix Service, Inc. Mt. Pleasant 62- 25 7.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Office 50 7.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Reichhold Houston 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE Austin Residential Center 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE Tacoma Transload Inc. Ellensburg 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE Southern Ambulance Service Ltd. 22 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: 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.