Health program administration · Washington

King County Public Health

Seattle, WA · ~2,027 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.1
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

King County Public Health runs at 128% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Health program administration workplace, earning a grade D.

King County Public Health: 4.1 TCR = 128% of Health program administration BLS 3.2 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

King County Public Health safety composite

King County Public Health scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 21%), 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

29/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.11 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.29 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% 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%).

King County Public Health held a steady TCR band

King County Public Health's TCR held near 0.0 from 3.9 in 2019 to 3.9 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 5.4 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.56× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=3.9 · 2020=3.5 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=5.4 · 2023=3.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 923120 · Seattle, WA ABOVE-IND · LARGE

Grade D · TCR 4.1 · 128% of ind

  • DART 2.3 DART
  • RANK #5/5
  • PHOTO Maricopa County - Co…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 235 inj
  • SIZE ~2,027 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Maricopa County - Correctional Health (260) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

King County Public Health in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows King County Public Health averages 4.1 TCR (128% of the Health program administration BLS benchmark).

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

King County Public Health TCR series: 2019=3.9 · 2020=3.5 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=5.4 · 2023=3.9 · BLS 3.2

Where King County Public Health falls in its industry

267 Health program administration establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 5 Health program administration employers in Washington.

King County Public Health (2,027 employees, TCR 4.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 89 employees and a TCR of 2.3 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 05001,0001,5002,0002,500 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate King County Public Health
King County Public Health (2,027 employees, TCR 4.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 89 employees and a TCR of 2.3

King County Public Health has more employees than the Health program administration median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.3. 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
2023 3.9 2.3 45 9 0
2022 5.4 3.7 63 17 0
2021 3.9 2.0 56 5 0
2020 3.5 2.5 29 19 0
2019 3.9 1.8 42 5 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

923120 · WA · Seattle

267 Health program administration employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 1,279 employers in Seattle, WA · 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 Maricopa County - Correctional Health (260) 4.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR AuSable Valley Community Mental Health 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Dept. of Health & Social Services (22) 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR CAN076-PHFE-CAN076 4.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE North American Operations - Matrix Service Inc. 2,063 FTE
STATE-SIZE Waste Treatment Completion Company (WTCC) 1,978 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wyckoff Farms, Inc. 2,083 FTE
STATE-SIZE Seattle Cancer Care Alliance 2,083 FTE
CITY-NEAR UW Seattle 32,378 FTE
CITY-NEAR The United States of America 25,000 FTE
CITY-NEAR Starz Entertainment 25,000 FTE
CITY-NEAR UW Medical Center - Montlake and NW 11,307 FTE
NAT-TCR Ward Manufacturing, LLC 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR S04012 - Denver Arapahoe Disposal (DADS) 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR South Burlington #228 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Jackson Al Dirt Cheap 4.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE 1855-MIDET210 2,027 FTE
NAT-SIZE North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : MDW4 2,027 FTE
NAT-SIZE Orlando 2,027 FTE
NAT-SIZE Selbyville Processing 2,026 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.