Foundation, building, poured concrete, contractors · California

CMatt Corporation

Santa Fe Springs, CA · ~55 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.3
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

CMatt Corporation runs at 153% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Foundation, building, poured concrete, contractors workplace, earning a grade D.

CMatt Corporation: 4.3 TCR = 153% of Foundation, building, poured concrete, contractors BLS 2.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

CMatt Corporation safety composite

CMatt Corporation scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 45%), 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

59/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 4.27 per 100 workers

Safer than 45% 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

−7.7

2017→2024

CMatt Corporation injury rate improved

CMatt Corporation's TCR fell 7.7 from 7.7 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 14.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=7.7 · 2018=2.6 · 2019=3.5 · 2020=14.1 · 2022=2.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238110 · Santa Fe Springs, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.3 · 153% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #81/166
  • PHOTO Culbertson Restorati…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 13 inj
  • SIZE ~55 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Culbertson Restoration of New York (0.0 TCR gap)

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

CMatt Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows CMatt Corporation averages 4.3 TCR (153% of the Foundation, building, poured concrete, contractors BLS benchmark).

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

CMatt Corporation TCR series: 2017=7.7 · 2018=2.6 · 2019=3.5 · 2020=14.1 · 2022=2 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 2.8

Where CMatt Corporation falls in its industry

1,314 Foundation, building, poured c establishments

Safer than 45% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #81 safest of 166 Foundation, building, poured c employers in California.

CMatt Corporation (55 employees, TCR 4.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 64 employees and a TCR of 3.8 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 0100200300 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate CMatt Corporation
CMatt Corporation (55 employees, TCR 4.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 64 employees and a TCR of 3.8

CMatt Corporation has fewer employees than the Foundation, building, poured concrete, c median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.8. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 2.0 2.0 1 0 0
2020 14.1 14.1 2 9 0
2019 3.5 3.5 3 0 0
2018 2.6 1.3 2 0 0
2017 7.7 7.7 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238110 · CA · Santa Fe Springs

1,314 Foundation, building, poured concrete, contractors employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 310 employers in Santa Fe Springs, 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 Culbertson Restoration of New York 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Olive 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Total Concrete Services Inc 4.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR All Phase Concrete Construction Inc 4.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE FARMING ADMINISTRATION 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Dwelley Family Farms LLC 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-Valley Vineyard Management 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cornerstone Certified Vineyard 55 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 423 3,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. 1,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI 1,179 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vans Distribution Center - SFS 757 FTE
NAT-TCR Sodexo at New Mexico State Univ 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR S04217 - WM of Southern Colorado - Colorado Springs 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Lci - 019 4.3 TCR
NAT-TCR West Acres Clinic 4.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Blue Aerospace 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Elmsford, NY 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dallas 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Honolulu International Airport - HNL Cabin 55 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, 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.