Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing · Ohio

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland

Ashland, OH · ~73 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.9
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland runs at 57% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland: 1.9 TCR = 57% of Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland safety composite

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 57% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 25%), 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

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.89 per 100 workers

Safer than 57% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.48 per 100 workers

Safer than 25% 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%).

Rising injury rate

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland: 0.0 → 2.5 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 5.1 TCR · DART/TCR 1.31× in 2024

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland's TCR rose 2.5 from 0.0 in 2021 to 2.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 5.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.31× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325611 · Ashland, OH AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 1.9 · 57% of ind

  • DART 2.5 DART
  • RANK #19/42
  • PHOTO State Industrial Pro…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~73 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: State Industrial Products-Hebron Facility (0.0 TCR gap)

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

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland averages 1.9 TCR (57% of the Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland TCR series: 2021=0 · 2022=5.1 · 2023=0 · 2024=2.5 · BLS 3.3

Where GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland falls in its industry

240 Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid establishments

Safer than 57% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Ohio alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #19 safest of 42 Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid employers in Ohio.

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland (73 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland
GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland (73 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 113 employees and a TCR of 2.3

GOJO Industries, Inc. - Ashland has fewer employees than the Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) ma 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 2.5 2.5 2 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 5.1 3.4 3 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325611 · OH · Ashland

240 Hand soaps (e.g., hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,650 rated employers in Ohio with headcount on file · 68 employers in Ashland, OH · 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 State Industrial Products-Hebron Facility 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR State Industrial Product Hebron 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Auto-Chlor Services LLC 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Stepan Company - Winder 1.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE A. Brown & Sons Nursery, Inc. 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bay Shore 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE 971-NiSource-Toledo OH-Op Ctr Manhattan Blv 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE Greater Dayton Construction LTD 73 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ashland University 2,668 FTE
CITY-NEAR Samaritan Medical Center 678 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 1448 421 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1448 368 FTE
NAT-TCR Jack Hilliard Distributing Co., Inc Garland 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR MetroPower Inc BR4 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Bel-Art Products, Pocomoke, MD 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Chicago Tube and Iron Company St Paul 1.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Richardson Elementary 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Wagner Houses 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Castle Hill Houses 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE 3360 - Rolling Hills 73 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.