Continuing Care Retirement Communities · Washington

Creekside Continuing Care Community

Burlington, WA · ~89 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
14.5
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Creekside Continuing Care Community runs at 381% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Continuing Care Retirement Communities workplace, earning a grade F.

Creekside Continuing Care Community: 14.5 TCR = 381% of Continuing Care Retirement Communities BLS 3.8 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Creekside Continuing Care Community safety composite

Creekside Continuing Care Community scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 7%), 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

21/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 14.46 per 100 workers

Safer than 14% of industry peers

DART rate
F 16.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 7% 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

Creekside Continuing Care Community: 8.3 → 31.0 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 31.0 TCR · DART/TCR 1.12× in 2024

Creekside Continuing Care Community's TCR rose 22.7 from 8.3 in 2020 to 31.0 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.12× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Burlington, WA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 14.5 · 381% of ind

  • DART 16.2 DART
  • RANK #90/109
  • PHOTO Windchime of Chico
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 37 inj
  • SIZE ~89 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Windchime of Chico (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Creekside Continuing Care Community in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Creekside Continuing Care Community averages 14.5 TCR (381% of the Continuing Care Retirement Communities BLS benchmark).

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

Creekside Continuing Care Community TCR series: 2020=8.3 · 2021=7.1 · 2022=8.7 · 2023=17.1 · 2024=31 · BLS 3.8

Where Creekside Continuing Care Community falls in its industry

4,127 Continuing Care Retirement Com establishments

Safer than 14% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #90 safest of 109 Continuing Care Retirement Com employers in Washington.

Creekside Continuing Care Community (89 employees, TCR 14.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Creekside Continuing Care Community
Creekside Continuing Care Community (89 employees, TCR 14.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Creekside Continuing Care Community has more employees than the Continuing Care Retirement Communities median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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 31.0 16.2 13 8 0
2023 17.1 12.4 10 1 0
2022 8.7 5.2 5 0 0
2021 7.1 5.3 4 0 0
2020 8.3 6.6 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · WA · Burlington

4,127 Continuing Care Retirement Communities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 67 employers in Burlington, 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 Windchime of Chico 14.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wesley Woods of Newnan 14.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Wyngate AT Parkersburg 14.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Arden Courts of Winter Springs 14.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE ACCO Seattle 89 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mountain States Const. Co. 89 FTE
STATE-SIZE Climate Pledge Arena 89 FTE
STATE-SIZE HTI Polymer 89 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sakuma Brothers Farms, Inc 384 FTE
CITY-NEAR 701-00024 340 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0662 - BURLINGTON WA WHSE 336 FTE
CITY-NEAR Fisher Construction Group, Inc. 331 FTE
NAT-TCR Four Corners 14.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Traditional Breads Inc 14.5 TCR
NAT-TCR West Coast Harvesting & Packing, Inc. 14.5 TCR
NAT-TCR RGS Landscape 14.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Rouses Market #80 89 FTE
NAT-SIZE Salk Institute for Biological Studies North 89 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dickson Electric Department 89 FTE
NAT-SIZE Able Home Care LLC 89 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.