Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) · Texas

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH

Big Spring, TX · ~123 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
4.2
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH runs at 65% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) workplace, earning a grade B.

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH: 4.2 TCR = 65% of Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) BLS 6.5 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH safety composite

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 78% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

69/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 4.23 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% of industry peers

DART rate
B 1.08 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH: 2.4 → 4.3 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 9.1 TCR · DART/TCR 0.26× in 2024

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH's TCR rose 1.9 from 2.4 in 2016 to 4.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 9.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.26× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Big Spring, TX AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 4.2 · 65% of ind

  • DART 1.1 DART
  • RANK #505/1034
  • PHOTO CCC OF MANDEVILLE
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 35 inj
  • SIZE ~123 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: CCC OF MANDEVILLE (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH averages 4.2 TCR (65% of the Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) BLS benchmark).

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

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH TCR series: 2016=2.4 · 2017=0.9 · 2018=1.4 · 2019=9.1 · 2020=3.4 · 2021=3.2 · 2022=5.5 · 2023=7.8 · 2024=4.3 · BLS 6.5

Where Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH falls in its industry

15,252 Convalescent homes or convales establishments

Safer than 73% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #505 safest of 1034 Convalescent homes or convales employers in Texas.

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH (123 employees, TCR 4.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH
Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH (123 employees, TCR 4.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Lamun-Lusk-Sanchez TSVH has more employees than the Convalescent homes or convalescent hospi median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.6. 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 4.3 1.1 4 0 0
2023 7.8 3.9 6 0 0
2022 5.5 0.0 4 0 0
2021 3.2 0.0 2 0 0
2020 3.4 0.0 3 0 0
2019 9.1 0.0 10 0 0
2018 1.4 0.7 2 0 0
2017 0.9 0.9 1 0 0
2016 2.4 0.0 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · TX · Big Spring

15,252 Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 32 employers in Big Spring, TX · 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 CCC OF MANDEVILLE 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Warde Rehabilitation & Nursing Center 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Temple West LLC 4.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Evermay at Branchville 4.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE USA Compression Partners - Gulf Coast 123 FTE
STATE-SIZE Longview Operations 123 FTE
STATE-SIZE Amarillo Technical Center A 123 FTE
STATE-SIZE Austin Underground Inc. 123 FTE
CITY-NEAR Federal Bureau of Prisons 1,072 FTE
CITY-NEAR 513 320 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 513 289 FTE
CITY-NEAR Big Spring Refinery 232 FTE
NAT-TCR Kenly 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR 09 Eveleth 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR KKR 4.2 TCR
NAT-TCR High Hotels Ltd - Spring Hill Suites - Ewing 4.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE UFP Windsor, LLC 123 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gregory Industries dba Gregory Roll Forming 123 FTE
NAT-SIZE Elk Mountain Farms 123 FTE
NAT-SIZE Redner's Warehouse Market Palmyra 123 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, 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.