Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Maryland

Kensington Park Senior Living

Kensington, MD · ~253 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Kensington Park Senior Living runs at 207% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Kensington Park Senior Living: 7.9 TCR = 207% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Kensington Park Senior Living safety composite

Kensington Park Senior Living scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 15%), 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

36/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 7.87 per 100 workers

Safer than 45% of industry peers

DART rate
F 10.03 per 100 workers

Safer than 15% 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

Kensington Park Senior Living: 7.0 → 15.1 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 15.1 TCR · DART/TCR 1.27× in 2024

Kensington Park Senior Living's TCR rose 8.1 from 7.0 in 2017 to 15.1 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.27× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Kensington, MD ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 7.9 · 207% of ind

  • DART 10.0 DART
  • RANK #50/79
  • PHOTO Artis Senior Living …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 78 inj
  • SIZE ~253 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Artis Senior Living of Bridgetown (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Kensington Park Senior Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Kensington Park Senior Living averages 7.9 TCR (207% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Kensington Park Senior Living TCR series: 2017=7 · 2018=9.3 · 2019=5.9 · 2021=2.2 · 2022=10.1 · 2023=5.6 · 2024=15.1 · BLS 3.8

Where Kensington Park Senior Living falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 45% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Maryland alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #50 safest of 79 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Maryland.

Kensington Park Senior Living (253 employees, TCR 7.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 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 0100200300 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Kensington Park Senior Living
Kensington Park Senior Living (253 employees, TCR 7.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Kensington Park Senior Living has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. 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 15.1 10.0 21 9 0
2023 5.6 5.1 4 7 0
2022 10.1 8.9 6 12 0
2021 2.2 2.2 2 2 0
2019 5.9 3.9 12 0 0
2018 9.3 7.8 19 0 0
2017 7.0 5.5 14 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MD · Kensington

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,213 rated employers in Maryland with headcount on file · 20 employers in Kensington, 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 Artis Senior Living of Bridgetown 7.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR EMS - Northern Lakes Asst Lvg 7.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Clarendale of Addison 7.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Beaver Dam Assited Living, LLC 7.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Spiniello Companies - Baltimore 253 FTE
STATE-SIZE 1193 - Gaithersburg 253 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hampstead 253 FTE
STATE-SIZE The Severn Group, Inc. 252 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sentral Building Services, llc 602 FTE
CITY-NEAR Rock Spring Contracting 400 FTE
CITY-NEAR Heffron Company 170 FTE
CITY-NEAR MBB Delivery LLC 166 FTE
NAT-TCR Dimco Enterprises LLC 7.9 TCR
NAT-TCR National Management Resources (Centenary College LA) 7.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Anns Choice 7.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Artis Senior Living of Bridgetown 7.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Fujifilm Holdings America Corporation 253 FTE
NAT-SIZE Logomark, Inc. 253 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lancaster 253 FTE
NAT-SIZE Chesterfield (Mt Clemens) MFG (EF, AUTO) 253 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.