Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities · Florida

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc.

Jacksonville, FL · ~42 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.5
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. runs at 171% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade D.

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc.: 6.5 TCR = 171% of Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. safety composite

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 54% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

53/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.49 per 100 workers

Safer than 54% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.01 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%).

TCR Δ

−4.1

2016→2018

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. injury rate improved

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc.'s TCR fell 4.1 from 7.1 in 2016 to 3.0 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2017 at 9.4 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.46× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=7.1 · 2017=9.4 · 2018=3.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Jacksonville, FL ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 6.5 · 171% of ind

  • DART 3.0 DART
  • RANK #129/283
  • PHOTO The Residence at Voo…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~42 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: The Residence at Voorhees (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. averages 6.5 TCR (171% of the Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. TCR series: 2016=7.1 · 2017=9.4 · 2018=3 · BLS 3.8

Where Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. falls in its industry

4,127 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 54% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Florida alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #129 safest of 283 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Florida.

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. (42 employees, TCR 6.5) 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc.
Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. (42 employees, TCR 6.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Fannie E Taylor Home for the Aged, Inc. has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities with on-site median and a lower 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
2018 3.0 3.0 1 0 0
2017 9.4 3.1 3 0 0
2016 7.1 4.7 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · FL · Jacksonville

4,127 Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 26,569 rated employers in Florida with headcount on file · 1,776 employers in Jacksonville, FL · 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 The Residence at Voorhees 6.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lakeview Village 6.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Vernon Woods Retirement Community 6.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Encore at Mahtomedi 6.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Milton District Office 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Crestview Local Office 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rangeline Service Center 42 FTE
STATE-SIZE Jacobs - Live Oak - OMI 42 FTE
CITY-NEAR UF HEALTH JACKSONVILLE 4,948 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mayo Clinic Jacksonville (Clinic) 4,567 FTE
CITY-NEAR Baptist Health System Jacksonville Baptist Medical Center 4,199 FTE
CITY-NEAR FLJAC - JACKSONVILLE 4,193 FTE
NAT-TCR Ever-Green Energy St Paul Ops 6.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Imaging and Sleep Center 6.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Harrisburg (Pahar) 6.5 TCR
NAT-TCR SMIU 6.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Solvay Cincinnati 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE AmNav - Oakland 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE Telfer Paving Technology-San Diego, CA 42 FTE
NAT-SIZE S & S Welding, Inc 42 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: 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.