Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Washington

Claremont Senior Living

Bremerton, WA · ~78 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
14.4
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Claremont Senior Living runs at 380% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Claremont Senior Living: 14.4 TCR = 380% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Claremont Senior Living safety composite

Claremont Senior Living scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 14%), 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

31/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 14.45 per 100 workers

Safer than 14% of industry peers

DART rate
D 4.94 per 100 workers

Safer than 37% 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

−1.5

2016→2019

Claremont Senior Living injury rate improved

Claremont Senior Living's TCR fell 1.5 from 14.7 in 2016 to 13.2 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 15.4 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.34× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=14.7 · 2017=15.4 · 2019=13.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Bremerton, WA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 14.4 · 380% of ind

  • DART 4.9 DART
  • RANK #171/216
  • PHOTO The Lodge Assisted L…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 28 inj
  • SIZE ~78 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: The Lodge Assisted Living and Memory Care Community (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Claremont Senior Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Claremont Senior Living averages 14.4 TCR (380% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Claremont Senior Living TCR series: 2016=14.7 · 2017=15.4 · 2019=13.2 · BLS 3.8

Where Claremont Senior Living falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 14% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #171 safest of 216 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Washington.

Claremont Senior Living (78 employees, TCR 14.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 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 0100200300 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Claremont Senior Living
Claremont Senior Living (78 employees, TCR 14.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Claremont Senior Living has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. 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 13.2 4.9 8 0 0
2017 15.4 7.7 11 1 0
2016 14.7 14.7 9 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · WA · Bremerton

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 83 employers in Bremerton, WA · 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 The Lodge Assisted Living and Memory Care Community 14.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Junction City Retirement and Assisted Living 14.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Meadowlands 14.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Artis Senior Living of West Shore 14.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Baker Produce, Inc 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bay Baby Produce, Inc. 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Seattle Shellfish 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pivetta Brothers Construction, Inc. 78 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2643-46230001-462301 786 FTE
CITY-NEAR Charleston Base, South Base, North Base and Harborside 434 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Bremerton 381 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kitsap Credit Union 286 FTE
NAT-TCR Birmingham DSD 14.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Chelmsford (Mache) 14.4 TCR
NAT-TCR 0488 - St Cloud, MN 14.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Domestic 14.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Bold High School Isd 2534 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE Beachtree Properties 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE 487983-Rio Grande Cs District 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE Mountain Ridge Center 78 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, 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.