Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), all materials, manufacturing · Maryland

Hunter Douglas Fabrication

Cumberland, MD · ~729 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Hunter Douglas Fabrication runs at 42% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), all materials, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Hunter Douglas Fabrication: 1.4 TCR = 42% of Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), all materials, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Hunter Douglas Fabrication safety composite

Hunter Douglas Fabrication scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 80% 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

63/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.39 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.1 per 100 workers

Safer than 52% 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

−0.7

2017→2022

Hunter Douglas Fabrication injury rate improved

Hunter Douglas Fabrication's TCR fell 0.7 from 2.0 in 2017 to 1.3 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2017 at 2.0 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.79× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.0 · 2018=1.5 · 2019=1.0 · 2020=1.3 · 2021=1.3 · 2022=1.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 337920 · Cumberland, MD AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.4 · 42% of ind

  • DART 1.1 DART
  • RANK P80
  • PHOTO Hunter Douglas Slat …
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 62 inj
  • SIZE ~729 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Hunter Douglas Slat Lake City (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Hunter Douglas Fabrication in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Hunter Douglas Fabrication averages 1.4 TCR (42% of the Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), all materials, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Hunter Douglas Fabrication TCR series: 2017=2 · 2018=1.5 · 2019=1 · 2020=1.3 · 2021=1.3 · 2022=1.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Hunter Douglas Fabrication falls in its industry

59 Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, establishments

Safer than 80% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers
Hunter Douglas Fabrication (729 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 144 employees and a TCR of 3.1 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 05001,0001,500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Hunter Douglas Fabrication
Hunter Douglas Fabrication (729 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 144 employees and a TCR of 3.1

Hunter Douglas Fabrication has more employees than the Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.1. 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
2022 1.3 1.1 7 0 0
2021 1.3 1.3 8 0 0
2020 1.3 1.3 8 0 0
2019 1.0 0.7 8 0 0
2018 1.5 1.1 12 0 0
2017 2.0 1.4 19 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

337920 · MD · Cumberland

59 Blinds (e.g., mini, venetian, vertical), all materials, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,213 rated employers in Maryland with headcount on file · 58 employers in Cumberland, MD · 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 Hunter Douglas Slat Lake City 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Vista Products - North Carolina 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hunter Douglas 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hunter Douglas Window Designs - NC 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Ports America Chesapeake - Seagirt Marine Terminal 733 FTE
STATE-SIZE AMZL : DBA3 733 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mona Electric Group Inc 724 FTE
STATE-SIZE Vane Line Bunkering, LLC - Baltimore 724 FTE
CITY-NEAR UPMC Western Maryland 1,984 FTE
CITY-NEAR American Woodmark Corp. 563 FTE
CITY-NEAR American Woodmark Corporation - Allegany Plant 537 FTE
CITY-NEAR 9234-95011115 485 FTE
NAT-TCR AHF, LLC West Plains Facility 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR 4795-PS-PNS-PENSACOLA-PNS-PSAA 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR 1145 - South Lebanon 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Sustainable Technologies 1.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lakeview Regional Medical Center 729 FTE
NAT-SIZE L.K. Jordan, Austin, LTD d/b/a LK Jordan & Associates 729 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rally Credit Union 729 FTE
NAT-SIZE I I Stanley Co., Inc. 729 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: 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.