Casinos (except casino hotels) · California

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation

Jamul, CA · ~636 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.7
Avg TCR
3.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation runs at 153% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Casinos (except casino hotels) workplace, earning a grade D.

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation: 4.7 TCR = 153% of Casinos (except casino hotels) BLS 3.1 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation safety composite

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 9%), 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

23/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.73 per 100 workers

Safer than 17% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.87 per 100 workers

Safer than 9% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

−2.1

2016→2019

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation injury rate improved

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation's TCR fell 2.1 from 6.4 in 2016 to 4.3 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2016 at 6.4 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.82× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=6.4 · 2017=3.6 · 2018=4.6 · 2019=4.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 713210 · Jamul, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 4.7 · 153% of ind

  • DART 3.9 DART
  • RANK #22/33
  • PHOTO Magic City Casino
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 89 inj
  • SIZE ~636 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Magic City Casino (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation averages 4.7 TCR (153% of the Casinos (except casino hotels) BLS benchmark).

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

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation TCR series: 2016=6.4 · 2017=3.6 · 2018=4.6 · 2019=4.3 · BLS 3.1

Where Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation falls in its industry

219 Casinos (except casino hotels) establishments

Safer than 17% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #22 safest of 33 Casinos (except casino hotels) employers in California.

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation (636 employees, TCR 4.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 337 employees and a TCR of 2.6 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 05001,0001,5002,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation
Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation (636 employees, TCR 4.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 337 employees and a TCR of 2.6

Jamul Indian Village Development Corporation has more employees than the Casinos (except casino hotels) median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.6. 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 4.3 3.9 30 0 0
2018 4.6 3.9 25 1 0
2017 3.6 1.2 22 0 0
2016 6.4 0.9 12 9 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

713210 · CA · Jamul

219 Casinos (except casino hotels) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 8 employers in Jamul, CA · 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 Magic City Casino 4.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Carson Plains Casino, LLC 4.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Odawa Casino 4.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Warm Springs Indian Head Casino 4.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE IA 636 FTE
STATE-SIZE Behr Corporate HQ 636 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fullerton / Orange 636 FTE
STATE-SIZE City of Chino 636 FTE
CITY-NEAR Jamul Casino 1,017 FTE
CITY-NEAR Steele Canyon Golf Club 86 FTE
CITY-NEAR JA Soden Framing 72 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pio Pico 36 FTE
NAT-TCR Sofco =Erectors,inc 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Portland/Downtown (HH) 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 6400-Swy 0017 2076 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 6400-Swy 0023 1066 4.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE GA 2605 Circle 75 Pkwy SE 636 FTE
NAT-SIZE North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : MDT1 636 FTE
NAT-SIZE Amzl : Dch2 636 FTE
NAT-SIZE Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay 636 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, 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.