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

Hope Landing

Charlotte, MI · ~25 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.6
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Hope Landing runs at 96% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade C.

Hope Landing: 3.6 TCR = 96% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Hope Landing safety composite

Hope Landing scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 84% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

74/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 3.64 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% 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

−5.8

2016→2024

Hope Landing injury rate improved

Hope Landing's TCR fell 5.8 from 5.8 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 8.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=5.8 · 2017=5.6 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=4.3 · 2022=8.6 · 2023=8.4 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Charlotte, MI AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.6 · 96% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #52/201
  • PHOTO Bryson Senior Living
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~25 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bryson Senior Living (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Hope Landing in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Hope Landing averages 3.6 TCR (96% 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

Hope Landing TCR series: 2016=5.8 · 2017=5.6 · 2018=0 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=4.3 · 2022=8.6 · 2023=8.4 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.8

Where Hope Landing falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 80% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #52 safest of 201 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Michigan.

Hope Landing (25 employees, TCR 3.6) 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 Hope Landing
Hope Landing (25 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Hope Landing has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a lower 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 8.4 0.0 2 0 0
2022 8.6 4.3 2 0 0
2021 4.3 0.0 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 5.6 5.6 1 0 0
2016 5.8 5.8 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MI · Charlotte

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 39 employers in Charlotte, MI · 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 Bryson Senior Living 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Edenton Retirement Community, LLC 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Bayshore 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cutter Mill 3.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Hazel Park 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bayside Best Beans LLC. 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-County Electric- Blanchard 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wastewater Treatment Plant 25 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spartan Motors, Inc. 805 FTE
CITY-NEAR Utilimaster 534 FTE
CITY-NEAR County of Eaton 455 FTE
CITY-NEAR Eaton County 422 FTE
NAT-TCR Hippodrome - 1120 Avenue of the Americas 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Ross Park #656 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR CCB, Inc. 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Sunrise Cooperative - Crestline 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE PCP-Fontana 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Homewood Suites Ocala at Heathbrook 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Curtis Products LLC 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Fei, Ltd 25 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, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.