Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Reural Development · California

Community Development Resource Agency

Auburn, CA · ~102 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.6
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Community Development Resource Agency runs at 82% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Reural Development workplace, earning a grade C.

Community Development Resource Agency: 2.6 TCR = 82% of Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Reural Development BLS 3.2 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Community Development Resource Agency safety composite

Community Development Resource Agency scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 1%), 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

28/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.62 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% of industry peers

DART rate
F 8.33 per 100 workers

Safer than 1% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

Community Development Resource Agency: 4.0 → 8.3 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 8.3 TCR · DART/TCR 3.18× in 2022

Community Development Resource Agency's TCR rose 4.3 from 4.0 in 2017 to 8.3 in 2022. In 2022, DART was 3.18× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 925120 · Auburn, CA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 2.6 · 82% of ind

  • DART 8.3 DART
  • RANK #10/14
  • PHOTO RMA Admin
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~102 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: RMA Admin (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Community Development Resource Agency in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Community Development Resource Agency averages 2.6 TCR (82% of the Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Reural Development BLS benchmark).

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

Community Development Resource Agency TCR series: 2017=4 · 2018=0.9 · 2019=0.9 · 2020=0.9 · 2021=0.7 · 2022=8.3 · BLS 3.2

Where Community Development Resource Agency falls in its industry

50 Administration of Urban Planni establishments

Safer than 36% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 14 Administration of Urban Planni employers in California.

Community Development Resource Agency (102 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 73 employees and a TCR of 2.4 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Community Development Resource Agency
Community Development Resource Agency (102 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 73 employees and a TCR of 2.4

Community Development Resource Agency has more employees than the Administration of Urban Planning and Com median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.4. 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
2022 8.3 8.3 0 3 0
2021 0.7 0.7 1 0 0
2020 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2019 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2018 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2017 4.0 4.0 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

925120 · CA · Auburn

50 Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Reural Development employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 96 employers in Auburn, 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 RMA Admin 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Community Development & Planning Commission 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Community Development 2.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR CHARLOTTESVILLE-NDS 2.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE REFCO FARMS LLC 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE The Pinery LLC 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE Del Rey Packing Co 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE ONM 102 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 37 2,161 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Valley Hospitals (30095) 762 FTE
CITY-NEAR Health and Human Services 743 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Auburn Faith Hospital (110-4001) 676 FTE
NAT-TCR Burnsville PN Clinic 14050 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Athens TMC - 1004 Boulevard Athens, GA 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Manheim Omaha 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Pretium Packaging - Hermann 2.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Zionsville 38370 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Myers Well Service Ohio Branch 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Joplin Health and Rehabilitation 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Augusta Operating - 2103 North Leg Drive 102 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: 2022, 2021, 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.