Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Massachusetts

Goddard House

Brookline, MA · ~115 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Goddard House runs at 260% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Goddard House: 9.9 TCR = 260% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Goddard House safety composite

Goddard House scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 66% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 32%), 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

48/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.88 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.96 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% 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

−4.4

2016→2024

Goddard House injury rate improved

Goddard House's TCR fell 4.4 from 5.4 in 2016 to 1.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 21.7 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.1× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=5.4 · 2017=5.3 · 2018=3.3 · 2019=11.8 · 2020=21.7 · 2021=12.4 · 2022=8.8 · 2023=19.4 · 2024=1.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Brookline, MA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 9.9 · 260% of ind

  • DART 1.0 DART
  • RANK #133/210
  • PHOTO Oakmont of Huntingto…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 46 inj
  • SIZE ~115 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Oakmont of Huntington Beach (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Goddard House in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Goddard House averages 9.9 TCR (260% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Goddard House TCR series: 2016=5.4 · 2017=5.3 · 2018=3.3 · 2019=11.8 · 2020=21.7 · 2021=12.4 · 2022=8.8 · 2023=19.4 · 2024=1 · BLS 3.8

Where Goddard House falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 32% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #133 safest of 210 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Massachusetts.

Goddard House (115 employees, TCR 9.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 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 0100200300 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Goddard House
Goddard House (115 employees, TCR 9.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Goddard House has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. 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 1.0 1.0 1 0 0
2023 19.4 19.4 8 5 0
2022 8.8 8.8 4 4 0
2021 12.4 12.4 7 5 0
2020 21.7 21.7 5 24 0
2019 11.8 10.6 9 1 0
2018 3.3 3.3 3 0 0
2017 5.3 4.0 4 0 0
2016 5.4 3.2 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MA · Brookline

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 22 employers in Brookline, MA · 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 Oakmont of Huntington Beach 9.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ohio Living - Swan Creek 9.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR PSL-Cordata Court 9.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Creekside at Three Rivers 9.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Salem Glass Company 115 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lynnfield MA Branch 115 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lakeside Book Company - North Chelmsford 115 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pace Industries - Cambridge Division 115 FTE
CITY-NEAR Brookline - MA 202 FTE
CITY-NEAR Trader Joe's 0501 Brookline 185 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2576-20 170 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2576-020 168 FTE
NAT-TCR Headquarters 9.9 TCR
NAT-TCR 1103 - NSM Orenco Station 9.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Asphalt Maintenance Solutions LLC 9.9 TCR
NAT-TCR SANDSTROM Products Company 9.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Donghee America Inc 115 FTE
NAT-SIZE San Bernard Electric Cooperative, Inc. 115 FTE
NAT-SIZE Nowak Construction Co., Inc. 115 FTE
NAT-SIZE EMCOR Services Team Mechanical 115 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, 2019, 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.