Construction management, industrial building (except warehouses) · California

John F. Otto Inc.

Sacramento, CA · ~131 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.8
Avg TCR
2.9
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

John F. Otto Inc. runs at 62% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Construction management, industrial building (except warehouses) workplace, earning a grade B.

John F. Otto Inc.: 1.8 TCR = 62% of Construction management, industrial building (except warehouses) BLS 2.9 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

John F. Otto Inc. safety composite

John F. Otto Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 30%), 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).

D

42/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 1.79 per 100 workers

Safer than 46% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.37 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% 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

−3.0

2017→2024

John F. Otto Inc. injury rate improved

John F. Otto Inc.'s TCR fell 3.0 from 4.3 in 2017 to 1.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 4.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.77× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.3 · 2018=0.9 · 2019=0.8 · 2020=2.8 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=0.9 · 2023=0.9 · 2024=1.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236210 · Sacramento, CA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 1.8 · 62% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #29/78
  • PHOTO Santa Cruz Nutrionals
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 19 inj
  • SIZE ~131 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Santa Cruz Nutrionals (0.0 TCR gap)

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

John F. Otto Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows John F. Otto Inc. averages 1.8 TCR (62% of the Construction management, industrial building (except warehouses) BLS benchmark).

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

John F. Otto Inc. TCR series: 2017=4.3 · 2018=0.9 · 2019=0.8 · 2020=2.8 · 2021=2.4 · 2022=0.9 · 2023=0.9 · 2024=1.4 · BLS 2.9

Where John F. Otto Inc. falls in its industry

924 Construction management, indus establishments

Safer than 46% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #29 safest of 78 Construction management, indus employers in California.

John F. Otto Inc. (131 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 1.6 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate John F. Otto Inc.
John F. Otto Inc. (131 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 1.6

John F. Otto Inc. has more employees than the Construction management, industrial buil median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.6. 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
2024 1.4 1.4 2 0 0
2023 0.9 0.0 1 0 0
2022 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2021 2.4 1.6 3 0 0
2020 2.8 2.8 4 0 0
2019 0.8 0.8 1 0 0
2018 0.9 0.0 1 0 0
2017 4.3 4.3 6 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236210 · CA · Sacramento

924 Construction management, industrial building (except warehouses) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 1,348 employers in Sacramento, 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 Santa Cruz Nutrionals 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR CAM Industrial Solutions @ Suncor Commerce City 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR 8778/4631-Moss Point Fabrication 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Astec - Sterling 1.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Babe Blosser Ranch 131 FTE
STATE-SIZE Dave Wilson Nursery 131 FTE
STATE-SIZE Gold Flora Corp 131 FTE
STATE-SIZE Land FLC 131 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Davis Health 10,481 FTE
CITY-NEAR Employment Development Department 8,494 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 451 5,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 485 5,500 FTE
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Neal Blaisdell Waikiki Shell 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR General Landscaping LLC 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR S04022 - Detroit Central Hauling 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Aurora Cooperative - Grand Island Agronomy 1.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Heritage Manor South 131 FTE
NAT-SIZE City of Redwood Falls 131 FTE
NAT-SIZE S03806 - Wildwood Hauling 131 FTE
NAT-SIZE S04045 - WM of Dallas 131 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.