New Single-Family Housing Construction · South Carolina

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston

Charleston, SC · ~110 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.3
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston runs at 33% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical New Single-Family Housing Construction workplace, earning a grade A.

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston: 1.3 TCR = 33% of New Single-Family Housing Construction BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston safety composite

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 79% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

71/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.25 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 77% 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

−3.2

2021→2024

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston injury rate improved

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston's TCR fell 3.2 from 3.2 in 2021 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 3.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=3.2 · 2022=1.8 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236115 · Charleston, SC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.3 · 33% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #3/10
  • PHOTO D.R. Horton, Inc. - …
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~110 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: D.R. Horton, Inc. - San Marcos (0.0 TCR gap)

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

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston averages 1.3 TCR (33% of the New Single-Family Housing Construction BLS benchmark).

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

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston TCR series: 2021=3.2 · 2022=1.8 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.8

Where D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston falls in its industry

976 New Single-Family Housing Cons establishments

Safer than 79% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 10 New Single-Family Housing Cons employers in South Carolina.

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston (110 employees, TCR 1.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 48 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston
D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston (110 employees, TCR 1.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 48 employees and a TCR of 3.5

D.R. Horton, Inc. - Charleston has more employees than the New Single-Family Housing Construction median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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 1.8 1.8 2 0 0
2021 3.2 2.1 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236115 · SC · Charleston

976 New Single-Family Housing Construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 341 employers in Charleston, SC · 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 D.R. Horton, Inc. - San Marcos 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR TRI Pointe Homes CO 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR RCS Construction 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Construction 1.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Network Controls & Electric, LLC 110 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bericap SC, LLC 110 FTE
STATE-SIZE JR Automation Technologies, LLC Liberty, SC 110 FTE
STATE-SIZE The Nason Company 110 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University Hospital Authority 8,204 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University of South Carolina 5,881 FTE
CITY-NEAR SC-03 4,525 FTE
CITY-NEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT DIVISION 1,790 FTE
NAT-TCR Branch 3263 - WP Charlotte 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR NHC Fort Sanders 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR JM Smucker Company 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR White Bear Lake Container 1.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Online Transport El Paso TX Domicile 110 FTE
NAT-SIZE All Temp Refrigeration, Inc. 110 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Laurels of Worthington 110 FTE
NAT-SIZE Regency at Bluffs Park 110 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.