General public administration · Minnesota

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion

Moorhead, MN · ~90 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
6.8
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion runs at 212% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical General public administration workplace, earning a grade F.

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion: 6.8 TCR = 212% of General public administration BLS 3.2 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion safety composite

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 53% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 34%), 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).

D

45/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.78 per 100 workers

Safer than 34% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 53% 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

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion: 0.0 → 2.8 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 14.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.21× in 2024

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion's TCR rose 2.8 from 0.0 in 2017 to 2.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 14.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.21× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 921190 · Moorhead, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 6.8 · 212% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #170/275
  • PHOTO Public Works (5500, …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 22 inj
  • SIZE ~90 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Public Works (5500, 5510, 5530, 5580) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Clay County - Juvenile Detenion averages 6.8 TCR (212% of the General public administration BLS benchmark).

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

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion TCR series: 2017=0 · 2019=14 · 2020=4.3 · 2021=10.2 · 2022=10.4 · 2023=5.8 · 2024=2.8 · BLS 3.2

Where Clay County - Juvenile Detenion falls in its industry

1,496 General public administration establishments

Safer than 34% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #170 safest of 275 General public administration employers in Minnesota.

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion (90 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 93 employees and a TCR of 4.6 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 0200400600800 010203040 Average employees Total Case Rate Clay County - Juvenile Detenion
Clay County - Juvenile Detenion (90 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 93 employees and a TCR of 4.6

Clay County - Juvenile Detenion has fewer employees than the General public administration median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.6. 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 2.8 1.4 2 0 0
2023 5.8 2.9 3 1 0
2022 10.4 10.4 5 2 0
2021 10.2 10.2 6 1 0
2020 4.3 2.9 3 0 0
2019 14.0 6.0 3 4 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

921190 · MN · Moorhead

1,496 General public administration employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 74 employers in Moorhead, 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 Public Works (5500, 5510, 5530, 5580) 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR City of Midland, Michigan 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR NN Department of Public Works 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alamance County 6.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bushel Boy - Owatonna 90 FTE
STATE-SIZE Radiant Change Construction, LLC. 90 FTE
STATE-SIZE Weis Builders - Minneapolis 90 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kelleher Construction, Inc 90 FTE
CITY-NEAR Minnesota State University Moorhead 828 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Moorhead 411 FTE
CITY-NEAR Eventide on Eighth 401 FTE
CITY-NEAR American Crystal Sugar Company Moorhead 387 FTE
NAT-TCR NA-US-PA-Bethlehem-Warehouse 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR City of Kentwood 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR 211AVN 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Corvallis or 6.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Bay Area Builders, Inc. 90 FTE
NAT-SIZE Marietta 054 90 FTE
NAT-SIZE Raleigh 011 90 FTE
NAT-SIZE Nolin RECC 90 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, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 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.