Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · New York

Landing of Poughkeepsie

Poughkeepsie, NY · ~66 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
12.8
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Landing of Poughkeepsie runs at 337% 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.

Landing of Poughkeepsie: 12.8 TCR = 337% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Landing of Poughkeepsie safety composite

Landing of Poughkeepsie scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 18%), 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

31/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 12.82 per 100 workers

Safer than 18% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.78 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% 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%).

TCR Δ

−6.8

2016→2020

Landing of Poughkeepsie injury rate improved

Landing of Poughkeepsie's TCR fell 6.8 from 18.3 in 2016 to 11.6 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2016 at 18.3 TCR. In 2020, DART was 0.45× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=18.3 · 2017=11.1 · 2019=10.3 · 2020=11.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Poughkeepsie, NY ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 12.8 · 337% of ind

  • DART 5.8 DART
  • RANK #242/283
  • PHOTO Lewis Park Estates S…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 28 inj
  • SIZE ~66 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Lewis Park Estates Senior Living (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Landing of Poughkeepsie in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Landing of Poughkeepsie averages 12.8 TCR (337% 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

Landing of Poughkeepsie TCR series: 2016=18.3 · 2017=11.1 · 2019=10.3 · 2020=11.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Landing of Poughkeepsie falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 18% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New York alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #242 safest of 283 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in New York.

Landing of Poughkeepsie (66 employees, TCR 12.8) 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 Landing of Poughkeepsie
Landing of Poughkeepsie (66 employees, TCR 12.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Landing of Poughkeepsie 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
2020 11.6 5.8 7 1 0
2019 10.3 6.2 5 0 0
2017 11.1 7.4 6 0 0
2016 18.3 8.3 10 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · NY · Poughkeepsie

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 21,008 rated employers in New York with headcount on file · 133 employers in Poughkeepsie, NY · 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 Lewis Park Estates Senior Living 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Great Lakes Management GTHI NorBella Prior Lake 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR ELGR 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Medina South 12.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Vireo Health of NY - Johnstown 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mammoser Farms 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE H.H. Dobbins Inc. 66 FTE
STATE-SIZE Merrick District 66 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vassar Brothers Medical Center 2,574 FTE
CITY-NEAR Dutchess County Government 1,750 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mid-Hudson Valley Staffco 1,401 FTE
CITY-NEAR Adams Fairacre Farms, Inc. 1,390 FTE
NAT-TCR Ndc Ny/Nj Hdl 12.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Marriott's Sea Pines (Monarch, Harbour Club, Heritage Club) 12.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Vancouver Police Dept West 12.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Physicians' Surgery Center of Nevada 12.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Nonprofit Management Services of Colorado 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE VCI:VC047 - VC047-VCI - Las Vegas, NV 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE Quasar Energy Group LLC 66 FTE
NAT-SIZE Central Pennsylvania Transportation, Inc - Lancaster, PA 66 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: 2020, 2019, 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.