Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · North Carolina

Haywood House

Canton, NC · ~30 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
10.5
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Haywood House runs at 276% 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.

Haywood House: 10.5 TCR = 276% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Haywood House safety composite

Haywood House scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 84% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 28%), 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 10.49 per 100 workers

Safer than 28% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% 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%).

TCR Δ

−10.7

2016→2023

Haywood House injury rate improved

Haywood House's TCR fell 10.7 from 10.7 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2020 at 26.1 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=10.7 · 2017=6.2 · 2018=6.0 · 2019=9.6 · 2020=26.1 · 2021=16.7 · 2022=8.8 · 2023=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Canton, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 10.5 · 276% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #288/356
  • PHOTO Rock Creek Inn
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 22 inj
  • SIZE ~30 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Rock Creek Inn (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Haywood House in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Haywood House averages 10.5 TCR (276% 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

Haywood House TCR series: 2016=10.7 · 2017=6.2 · 2018=6 · 2019=9.6 · 2020=26.1 · 2021=16.7 · 2022=8.8 · 2023=0 · BLS 3.8

Where Haywood House falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 28% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #288 safest of 356 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in North Carolina.

Haywood House (30 employees, TCR 10.5) 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 Haywood House
Haywood House (30 employees, TCR 10.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Haywood House has fewer 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
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 8.8 8.8 2 0 0
2021 16.7 0.0 4 0 0
2020 26.1 0.0 6 1 0
2019 9.6 3.2 3 0 0
2018 6.0 0.0 2 0 0
2017 6.2 3.1 2 0 0
2016 10.7 3.5 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · NC · Canton

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 16 employers in Canton, NC · 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 Rock Creek Inn 10.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR SPRING ARBOR OF RICHMOND 10.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sarabella Senior Living 10.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Montclair Poulsbo 10.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Shugart Farm 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hays Hatchery 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hight Family Farms LLC 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE High Point Operations Center 30 FTE
CITY-NEAR Evergreen Packaging - Canton 967 FTE
CITY-NEAR Canton, NC 412 FTE
CITY-NEAR ConMet Canton 394 FTE
CITY-NEAR Store 055 178 FTE
NAT-TCR M&J Automotive DBA Montrose Buick Gmc Cadillac 10.5 TCR
NAT-TCR SPR Kansas City 10.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Viwinco, Inc. 10.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Irving, Tx #00167 10.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Residence Inn by Marriott 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE All-Phase Electric Supply (PC0946) 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Arrow Magnolia International INC 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Central Florida Underground, Inc. 30 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, 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.