Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services · Indiana

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS)

Fishers, IN · ~39 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.6
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) runs at 60% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services workplace, earning a grade B.

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS): 1.6 TCR = 60% of Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services BLS 2.6 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) safety composite

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 69% 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

58/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 1.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 53% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% 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

−3.1

2018→2019

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) injury rate improved

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS)'s TCR fell 3.1 from 3.1 in 2018 to 0.0 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2018 at 3.1 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=3.1 · 2019=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561621 · Fishers, IN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 1.6 · 60% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #4/5
  • PHOTO GRE-CPIS-GREENVILLE,SC
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~39 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: GRE-CPIS-GREENVILLE,SC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) averages 1.6 TCR (60% of the Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services BLS benchmark).

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

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) TCR series: 2018=3.1 · 2019=0 · BLS 2.6

Where Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) falls in its industry

161 Security alarm systems sales c establishments

Safer than 53% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Indiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 5 Security alarm systems sales c employers in Indiana.

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) (39 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 1.7 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 0100200300400500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS)
Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) (39 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 1.7

Fishers #X Logic FS (SSS, CSS) has fewer employees than the Security alarm systems sales combined wi median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.7. 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
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 3.1 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561621 · IN · Fishers

161 Security alarm systems sales combined with installation, repair, or monitoring services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,750 rated employers in Indiana with headcount on file · 124 employers in Fishers, IN · 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 GRE-CPIS-GREENVILLE,SC 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Riverside FS (SSS, CSS) 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Irving FS (SSS, CSS) 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Toepfer Security Corp. 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Indiana Limestone Company Headquarters 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lafayette Operations Center 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Spy Run Bldg 3 39 FTE
STATE-SIZE Carroll White REMC - Monticello 39 FTE
CITY-NEAR Stratosphere Quality, LLC 2,028 FTE
CITY-NEAR DEEM LLC 1,040 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mainscape, Inc. 916 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Fishers 627 FTE
NAT-TCR CA.SAN J.2 - Ricoh Usa, Inc. 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Sulzer ChemTech CTUS - Tulsa 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Paradigm Precision 3651 SE Commerce Ave Stuart FL 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Battenfeld Technologies Inc 1.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Macintosh 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gainco 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE Fiberglass Innovations 39 FTE
NAT-SIZE FAB EXPRESS, INC. - Ft. Wayne 39 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: 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.