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

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living

Sacramento, CA · ~78 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.7
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living runs at 229% 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.

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living: 8.7 TCR = 229% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living safety composite

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 35%), 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

40/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 8.72 per 100 workers

Safer than 39% of industry peers

DART rate
D 5.29 per 100 workers

Safer than 35% 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

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living: 0.0 → 10.6 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 20.2 TCR · DART/TCR 0.61× in 2021

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living's TCR rose 10.6 from 0.0 in 2016 to 10.6 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2020 at 20.2 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.61× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Sacramento, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 8.7 · 229% of ind

  • DART 5.3 DART
  • RANK #286/635
  • PHOTO Oaks at Pooler
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~78 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Oaks at Pooler (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living averages 8.7 TCR (229% 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

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=12.3 · 2018=5.4 · 2019=3.8 · 2020=20.2 · 2021=10.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 39% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #286 safest of 635 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in California.

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living (78 employees, TCR 8.7) 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 Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living
Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living (78 employees, TCR 8.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Greenhaven Estates Assisted Living 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
2021 10.6 5.3 4 0 0
2020 20.2 20.2 1 10 0
2019 3.8 3.8 1 1 0
2018 5.4 3.6 3 0 0
2017 12.3 7.0 7 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · CA · Sacramento

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 1,348 employers in Sacramento, CA · 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 Oaks at Pooler 8.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Madison West 8.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Augustana CO Castle Peak 8.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Heights Crossing 8.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE California Endive Farms 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE VF - Napa 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Russell Harris Farms 78 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hadley Date Gardens, Inc. 78 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Davis Health 10,481 FTE
CITY-NEAR Employment Development Department 8,494 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 451 5,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 485 5,500 FTE
NAT-TCR Reasors13 8.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Colonial Park Care Center 8.7 TCR
NAT-TCR The G.C. Broach Company - Shop 8.7 TCR
NAT-TCR CSS Farms - Cody 8.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Heartis Fayetteville 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Peaks at Old Laramie Trail 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bio Star Films, LLC 78 FTE
NAT-SIZE Madison Hospice 78 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: 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.