Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) manufacturing · California

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA

Hanford, CA · ~26 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
11.2
Avg TCR
3.9
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA runs at 287% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade F.

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA: 11.2 TCR = 287% of Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) manufacturing BLS 3.9 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA safety composite

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 1%), 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

15/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 11.2 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
F 15.86 per 100 workers

Safer than 1% 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%).

Rising injury rate

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA: 15.4 → 15.9 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 15.9 TCR · DART/TCR 1.42× in 2024

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA's TCR rose 0.5 from 15.4 in 2016 to 15.9 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.42× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311119 · Hanford, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 11.2 · 287% of ind

  • DART 15.9 DART
  • RANK #33/36
  • PHOTO Hope Feed Mill
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 25 inj
  • SIZE ~26 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Hope Feed Mill (0.1 TCR gap)

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

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA averages 11.2 TCR (287% of the Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA TCR series: 2016=15.4 · 2017=3 · 2018=11.4 · 2019=11.7 · 2021=12.5 · 2022=8.3 · 2023=11.5 · 2024=15.9 · BLS 3.9

Where J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA falls in its industry

756 Animal feed mills (except dog establishments

Safer than 4% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #33 safest of 36 Animal feed mills (except dog employers in California.

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA (26 employees, TCR 11.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 36 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 050100150200 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA
J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA (26 employees, TCR 11.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 36 employees and a TCR of 3.5

J.D. Heiskell & Co. Hanford CA has fewer employees than the Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) m median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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 15.9 15.9 4 0 0
2023 11.5 11.5 3 0 0
2022 8.3 8.3 2 0 0
2021 12.5 12.5 4 0 0
2019 11.7 8.8 4 0 0
2018 11.4 11.4 3 0 0
2017 3.0 3.0 1 0 0
2016 15.4 3.1 4 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311119 · CA · Hanford

756 Animal feed mills (except dog and cat) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 118 employers in Hanford, 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 Hope Feed Mill 11.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Feed Energy Company - DM 11.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jacoby & Jacoby, Inc 11.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Trouw Nutrition Neosho 10.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE HAULING & TRAILER SHOP 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE Seasholtz Co., LLC 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE Redwood Valley Vineyards 26 FTE
STATE-SIZE North Central Coast Vineyards 26 FTE
CITY-NEAR Daniel C. Salas Harvesting Inc. 2,932 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hanford Community Hospital 1,849 FTE
CITY-NEAR 9292-AHHF001 - HOSPITAL 1,153 FTE
CITY-NEAR A.M. AG ENTERPRISE, INC. 976 FTE
NAT-TCR Waterford Place Health Campus 11.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Central Processing 11.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Plastic Products Co., Inc. - Princeton, MN 11.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Wehmeier Drywall & Painting, Inc. 11.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Ruston Paving Co., Inc - Rochester, NY 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Fair & Expo 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Police - Administration (Office of the Chief) 26 FTE
NAT-SIZE Macon County Highway Department 26 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, 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.