Nursing homes · Georgia

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation

Union Point, GA · ~62 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
12.1
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation runs at 186% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Nursing homes workplace, earning a grade D.

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation: 12.1 TCR = 186% of Nursing homes BLS 6.5 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation safety composite

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 92% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 19%), 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)
F 12.12 per 100 workers

Safer than 19% of industry peers

DART rate
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 92% 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

−8.4

2016→2023

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation injury rate improved

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation's TCR fell 8.4 from 8.4 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 69.2 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=8.4 · 2017=44.0 · 2018=3.6 · 2019=4.5 · 2020=61.0 · 2022=69.2 · 2023=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Union Point, GA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 12.1 · 186% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #177/259
  • PHOTO Neodesha Care and Re…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 23 inj
  • SIZE ~62 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Neodesha Care and Rehab (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation averages 12.1 TCR (186% of the Nursing homes BLS benchmark).

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

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation TCR series: 2016=8.4 · 2017=44 · 2018=3.6 · 2019=4.5 · 2020=61 · 2022=69.2 · 2023=0 · BLS 6.5

Where Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation falls in its industry

15,252 Nursing homes establishments

Safer than 19% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #177 safest of 259 Nursing homes employers in Georgia.

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation (62 employees, TCR 12.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation
Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation (62 employees, TCR 12.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Greene Point Health and Rehabilitation has fewer employees than the Nursing homes median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.6. 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
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 69.2 63.5 5 31 0
2020 61.0 58.5 1 24 0
2019 4.5 2.3 2 0 0
2018 3.6 1.8 2 0 0
2017 44.0 4.2 9 12 0
2016 8.4 6.3 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · GA · Union Point

15,252 Nursing homes employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 3 employers in Union Point, GA · 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 Neodesha Care and Rehab 12.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Willow Creek Retirement Center 12.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Caraday of Corpus Christi 12.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Pioneer Care Center 12.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE JACKSON EMC - JEFFERSON 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Minola Operating 5215 Minola Dr 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Brunswick Operating and Transmission Maintenance Center - 3951 & 3915 Community Rd. 62 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bloomington 62 FTE
CITY-NEAR Greene Point Health and Rehab 59 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lincoln Lumber Georgia, LLC 26 FTE
NAT-TCR Trago Mechanical Inc. 12.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Hrc 753 12.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Pacifica Peoria LLC 12.1 TCR
NAT-TCR American House - Sterling Meadows 12.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Central Regional Operations 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE Therm-O-Rock East, Inc. 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE BG Products Derby Facility 62 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brunson Instrument Company Inc. 62 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: 2023, 2022, 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.