Patrol services, security · Minnesota

General Security Services Corporation

Minneapolis, MN · ~338 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.9
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

General Security Services Corporation runs at 75% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Patrol services, security workplace, earning a grade B.

General Security Services Corporation: 1.9 TCR = 75% of Patrol services, security BLS 2.6 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

General Security Services Corporation safety composite

General Security Services Corporation scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 58% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 28%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.95 per 100 workers

Safer than 58% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.03 per 100 workers

Safer than 28% 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%).

TCR Δ

−0.8

2020→2024

General Security Services Corporation injury rate improved

General Security Services Corporation's TCR fell 0.8 from 2.8 in 2020 to 2.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 2.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.04× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2020=2.8 · 2021=1.7 · 2022=2.0 · 2023=1.1 · 2024=2.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561612 · Minneapolis, MN AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 1.9 · 75% of ind

  • DART 2.0 DART
  • RANK #4/5
  • PHOTO Harvard Protection S…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 29 inj
  • SIZE ~338 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Harvard Protection Services LLC of Pennsylvania (0.0 TCR gap)

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

General Security Services Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows General Security Services Corporation averages 1.9 TCR (75% of the Patrol services, security BLS benchmark).

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

General Security Services Corporation TCR series: 2020=2.8 · 2021=1.7 · 2022=2 · 2023=1.1 · 2024=2 · BLS 2.6

Where General Security Services Corporation falls in its industry

158 Patrol services, security establishments

Safer than 58% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 5 Patrol services, security employers in Minnesota.

General Security Services Corporation (338 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 176 employees and a TCR of 2.3 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 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate General Security Services Corporation
General Security Services Corporation (338 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 176 employees and a TCR of 2.3

General Security Services Corporation has more employees than the Patrol services, security median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.3. 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 2.0 2.0 5 0 0
2023 1.1 0.8 2 1 0
2022 2.0 1.7 6 0 0
2021 1.7 1.4 6 0 0
2020 2.8 2.0 10 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561612 · MN · Minneapolis

158 Patrol services, security employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 1,321 employers in Minneapolis, MN · 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 Harvard Protection Services LLC of Pennsylvania 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR PACWEST Security Services 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Security Personnel Inc 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Apex- Houston 1.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE NAC Mechanical & Electrical 338 FTE
STATE-SIZE Valley Apple Ford INC, dba Apple Ford Lincoln Apple Valley 338 FTE
STATE-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - DMS2 338 FTE
STATE-SIZE MnSCU System Office 338 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Twin Cities 22,522 FTE
CITY-NEAR MN950 MN TELECOMMUTER 12,021 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0501 - City Center 8,459 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hennepin County Medical Center 7,030 FTE
NAT-TCR Curt - 134 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Wildstone Construction, LLC 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Mutual Drug 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Johnson Bros. Corporation, a Southland Company - 1028 ARDOT I-30 1.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Carlex Vonore Glass Plant 338 FTE
NAT-SIZE Richelieu Foods Wheeling 338 FTE
NAT-SIZE Flowers Baking Company of Thomasville LLC, Thomasville Bakery 338 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rich Products Brunswick 338 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.