Amusement device (except gambling) concession operators (i.e., supplying and servicing in others' facilities) · Maryland

iFLY Baltimore

White Marsh, MD · ~30 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
14.6
Avg TCR
3.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

iFLY Baltimore runs at 471% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Amusement device (except gambling) concession operators (i.e., supplying and servicing in others' facilities) workplace, earning a grade F.

iFLY Baltimore: 14.6 TCR = 471% of Amusement device (except gambling) concession operators (i.e., supplying and servicing in others' facilities) BLS 3.1 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

iFLY Baltimore safety composite

iFLY Baltimore scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 5%), 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).

F

19/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 14.59 per 100 workers

Safer than 12% of industry peers

DART rate
F 24.3 per 100 workers

Safer than 5% 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

iFLY Baltimore: 0.0 → 24.3 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 24.3 TCR · DART/TCR 1.67× in 2019

iFLY Baltimore's TCR rose 24.3 from 0.0 in 2016 to 24.3 in 2019. In 2019, DART was 1.67× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 713990 · White Marsh, MD ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 14.6 · 471% of ind

  • DART 24.3 DART
  • RANK #8/10
  • PHOTO Woodley Lakes Golf M…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~30 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Woodley Lakes Golf Maintenance Division (0.3 TCR gap)

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

iFLY Baltimore in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows iFLY Baltimore averages 14.6 TCR (471% of the Amusement device (except gambling) concession operators (i.e., supplying and servicing in others' facilities) BLS benchmark).

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

iFLY Baltimore TCR series: 2016=0 · 2018=19.5 · 2019=24.3 · BLS 3.1

Where iFLY Baltimore falls in its industry

289 Amusement device (except gambl establishments

Safer than 12% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Maryland alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #8 safest of 10 Amusement device (except gambl employers in Maryland.

iFLY Baltimore (30 employees, TCR 14.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 5.0 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 0200400600800 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate iFLY Baltimore
iFLY Baltimore (30 employees, TCR 14.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 42 employees and a TCR of 5.0

iFLY Baltimore has fewer employees than the Amusement device (except gambling) conce median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.0. 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
2019 24.3 24.3 4 0 0
2018 19.5 4.9 4 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

713990 · MD · White Marsh

289 Amusement device (except gambling) concession operators (i.e., supplying and servicing in others' facilities) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,213 rated employers in Maryland with headcount on file · 23 employers in White Marsh, 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 Woodley Lakes Golf Maintenance Division 14.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Recreation 14.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR PHX-SGI-IFLY PHOENIX 15.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR CAPITAL PLAZA, LANDOVER MD 13.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Wildcat Point Generation Facility 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oliver Homes, Inc. 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE 2016106 - NIST Building 245 Modernization T.O. #1 & 6 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Life Science Products, Inc 30 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - MTN9 1,386 FTE
CITY-NEAR White Marsh Office 545 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6458-ZBAL 256 FTE
CITY-NEAR TransCore - T0322 - White Marsh 163 FTE
NAT-TCR Billings Partners, LLC 14.6 TCR
NAT-TCR LQ0655 Ventura 14.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Ivy Acres - NJ 14.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 36-Villa Espana 14.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE iFLY Portland 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Southeastern Door and Window, Inc 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brookover Ranch Feedyard 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE FOOD Share 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: 2019, 2018, 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.