Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities · Massachusetts

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates

Peabody, MA · ~85 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates runs at 103% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade C.

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates: 3.9 TCR = 103% of Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates safety composite

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 78% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

68/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 3.91 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.36 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% 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

−5.8

2021→2024

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates injury rate improved

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates's TCR fell 5.8 from 7.1 in 2021 to 1.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 7.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.35× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=7.1 · 2022=3.1 · 2023=4.1 · 2024=1.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Peabody, MA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.9 · 103% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #23/80
  • PHOTO Morning Pointe of Ri…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 11 inj
  • SIZE ~85 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Morning Pointe of Richmond (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates averages 3.9 TCR (103% of the Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates TCR series: 2021=7.1 · 2022=3.1 · 2023=4.1 · 2024=1.4 · BLS 3.8

Where Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates falls in its industry

4,127 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 78% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #23 safest of 80 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Massachusetts.

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates (85 employees, TCR 3.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates
Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates (85 employees, TCR 3.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Harriet and Ralph Kaplan Estates has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities with on-site median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2023 4.1 4.1 3 0 0
2022 3.1 1.5 2 0 0
2021 7.1 7.1 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · MA · Peabody

4,127 Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 86 employers in Peabody, 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 Morning Pointe of Richmond 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lakeside Village 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Home for the Aged 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR ACTS Retirement-Life Communities - Brittany Point Estates 3.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE IPS - Integrated Project Services, LLC - Cardinal 85 FTE
STATE-SIZE BlueHive/Continental Woodcraft 85 FTE
STATE-SIZE 90003930 Canal 3 Simple Cycle Project 85 FTE
STATE-SIZE NA-US-MA-Wilmington- Research Drive 85 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bridgewell INC 1,115 FTE
CITY-NEAR Brooksby Village 823 FTE
CITY-NEAR Analogic 8 Centennial Dr Peabody MA 652 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lahey Clinic North 503 FTE
NAT-TCR Bo Lacey Construction 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Carriage Inn of Steubenville 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Corey Oil LTD 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Amazon.com Services LLC - DDC3 3.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Affinity Health Center 85 FTE
NAT-SIZE Accel Air Systems 85 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gaithersburg Cabinetry & Millwork 85 FTE
NAT-SIZE Detroit 85 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.