Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards for transportation) · California

Harris Ranch Feeding Company

Coalinga, CA · ~201 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.8
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Harris Ranch Feeding Company runs at 150% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards for transportation) workplace, earning a grade D.

Harris Ranch Feeding Company: 6.8 TCR = 150% of Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards for transportation) BLS 4.5 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Harris Ranch Feeding Company safety composite

Harris Ranch Feeding Company scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 36%), 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

45/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.75 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.97 per 100 workers

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

−0.6

2018→2024

Harris Ranch Feeding Company injury rate improved

Harris Ranch Feeding Company's TCR fell 0.6 from 6.5 in 2018 to 5.9 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 9.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.44× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=6.5 · 2019=5.2 · 2021=6.0 · 2022=7.9 · 2023=9.0 · 2024=5.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 112112 · Coalinga, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 6.8 · 150% of ind

  • DART 3.0 DART
  • RANK #3/5
  • PHOTO Glenvil
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 76 inj
  • SIZE ~201 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Glenvil (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Harris Ranch Feeding Company in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Harris Ranch Feeding Company averages 6.8 TCR (150% of the Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards for transportation) BLS benchmark).

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

Harris Ranch Feeding Company TCR series: 2018=6.5 · 2019=5.2 · 2021=6 · 2022=7.9 · 2023=9 · 2024=5.9 · BLS 4.5

Where Harris Ranch Feeding Company falls in its industry

165 Beef cattle feedlots (except s establishments

Safer than 36% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 5 Beef cattle feedlots (except s employers in California.

Harris Ranch Feeding Company (201 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 employees and a TCR of 5.4 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 Harris Ranch Feeding Company
Harris Ranch Feeding Company (201 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 employees and a TCR of 5.4

Harris Ranch Feeding Company has more employees than the Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.4. 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 5.9 3.0 12 0 0
2023 9.0 4.7 20 1 0
2022 7.9 2.6 12 0 0
2021 6.0 4.2 5 5 0
2019 5.2 3.6 11 2 0
2018 6.5 2.0 16 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

112112 · CA · Coalinga

165 Beef cattle feedlots (except stockyards for transportation) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 16 employers in Coalinga, 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 Glenvil 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Randall County Feedyard 6.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR LS QUIEN SABE LLC 6.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Centerfire Feedyard 6.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE MALAGA BUILDING D 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE AM Ortega Construction Inc. 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE 103171 - Huntington Beach Energy Project 201 FTE
STATE-SIZE DFA FLUID - CITY OF INDUSTRY CA-SOUTH 201 FTE
CITY-NEAR Department of State Hospitals-Coalinga 2,050 FTE
CITY-NEAR DEPARTMENT OF STATE HOSPITALS - COALINGA 1,969 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 225 1,638 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 1,326 FTE
NAT-TCR Sealtech, Inc 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Thomas Lake Elementary School 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Tiff's Treats - H13 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Glenview Community Ice Center 6.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE OPTO International, Inc. 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE 2nd Ave 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE Keystone RV Company - Plant 4 201 FTE
NAT-SIZE SICK Campus 201 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, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.