Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning services) · Tennessee

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains

Gatlinburg, TN · ~32 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.8
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains runs at 41% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning services) workplace, earning a grade A.

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains: 1.8 TCR = 41% of Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning services) BLS 4.5 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains safety composite

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 74% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 25%), 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

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.83 per 100 workers

Safer than 74% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.66 per 100 workers

Safer than 25% 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

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains: 0.0 → 3.7 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 3.7 TCR · DART/TCR 2× in 2017

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains's TCR rose 3.7 from 0.0 in 2016 to 3.7 in 2017. In 2017, DART was 2× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561720 · Gatlinburg, TN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.8 · 41% of ind

  • DART 3.7 DART
  • RANK #41/119
  • PHOTO SODEXO AT ADVENTIST …
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~32 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SODEXO AT ADVENTIST HEALTH PORTLAND (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains averages 1.8 TCR (41% of the Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning services) BLS benchmark).

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

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=3.7 · BLS 4.5

Where Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains falls in its industry

4,064 Housekeeping services (i.e., c establishments

Safer than 74% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Tennessee alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #41 safest of 119 Housekeeping services (i.e., c employers in Tennessee.

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains (32 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2 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 02004006008001,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains
Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains (32 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2

Holiday Inn Club Vacations Smoky Mountains has fewer employees than the Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning se median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.2. 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
2017 3.7 3.7 1 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561720 · TN · Gatlinburg

4,064 Housekeeping services (i.e., cleaning services) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,743 rated employers in Tennessee with headcount on file · 20 employers in Gatlinburg, TN · 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 SODEXO AT ADVENTIST HEALTH PORTLAND 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR PSSI - 0085 Simmons Foods Inc. - Van Buren 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR St. Vincent Health System - EV 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Enloe Medical Center 1.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE L & H Gin 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hallsdale-Powell Utility District (Operations Building) 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Harvest Construction Company LLC 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Clinard Civil Contracting 32 FTE
CITY-NEAR Smoky Mountain Resort 468 FTE
CITY-NEAR Anakeesta LLC 462 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Gatlinburg 345 FTE
CITY-NEAR Holler 328 FTE
NAT-TCR SAT_Cleveland 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Heyburn Building 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR HBSHSETX08 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Orange Avenue (Flora) 1.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Contour Construction 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Spring hill Farm Dairy Inc 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rai Mx Ord 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE 0052 - Everett, Wa 32 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: 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.