Sheriffs' offices (except court functions only) · Minnesota

Law Enforcement Center

Red Wing, MN · ~113 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.6
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Law Enforcement Center runs at 238% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Sheriffs' offices (except court functions only) workplace, earning a grade F.

Law Enforcement Center: 7.6 TCR = 238% of Sheriffs' offices (except court functions only) BLS 3.2 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Law Enforcement Center safety composite

Law Enforcement Center scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 72% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 53%), 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

63/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 7.63 per 100 workers

Safer than 61% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.89 per 100 workers

Safer than 72% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 53% 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

Law Enforcement Center: 3.7 → 5.7 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 23.3 TCR · DART/TCR 0.25× in 2024

Law Enforcement Center's TCR rose 1.9 from 3.7 in 2017 to 5.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 23.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.25× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 922120 · Red Wing, MN ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 7.6 · 238% of ind

  • DART 1.9 DART
  • RANK #27/71
  • PHOTO Sheriff's Office-SAR
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 36 inj
  • SIZE ~113 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Sheriff's Office-SAR (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Law Enforcement Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Law Enforcement Center averages 7.6 TCR (238% of the Sheriffs' offices (except court functions only) BLS benchmark).

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

Law Enforcement Center TCR series: 2017=3.7 · 2018=4.6 · 2019=8.4 · 2020=5 · 2021=7.2 · 2022=23.3 · 2023=3.2 · 2024=5.7 · BLS 3.2

Where Law Enforcement Center falls in its industry

716 Sheriffs' offices (except cour establishments

Safer than 61% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 9.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #27 safest of 71 Sheriffs' offices (except cour employers in Minnesota.

Law Enforcement Center (113 employees, TCR 7.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 95 employees and a TCR of 9.5 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 0200400600 0102030 Average employees Total Case Rate Law Enforcement Center
Law Enforcement Center (113 employees, TCR 7.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 95 employees and a TCR of 9.5

Law Enforcement Center has more employees than the Sheriffs' offices (except court function median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 9.5. 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 5.7 1.9 5 1 0
2023 3.2 2.1 1 2 0
2022 23.3 18.2 7 16 0
2021 7.2 4.1 5 2 0
2020 5.0 3.0 3 2 0
2019 8.4 2.8 8 1 0
2018 4.6 2.8 3 2 0
2017 3.7 1.9 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

922120 · MN · Red Wing

716 Sheriffs' offices (except court functions only) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 68 employers in Red Wing, MN · 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 Sheriff's Office-SAR 7.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR District 3 (Police) 7.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Morton Grove Police Department 7.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sheriff's Office-Jail 7.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE The Boldt Company - Rochester, MN 113 FTE
STATE-SIZE MPM - Mankato 113 FTE
STATE-SIZE Southern Minnesota Construction 113 FTE
STATE-SIZE MN Office 113 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mayo Clinic Health System-Red Wing 606 FTE
CITY-NEAR Red Wing Sala 524 FTE
CITY-NEAR Red Wing, MN 497 FTE
CITY-NEAR Red Wing Shoe Co. - Plant 2 418 FTE
NAT-TCR Plasticade 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Cummings "Barefoot Brand" Flooring Co. Inc. 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Sunbelt Vacuum Service, Inc. 7.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 3500-DRC-ELLSWORTH 7.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Marlen International, Inc. 113 FTE
NAT-SIZE Nyx Logistics LLC 113 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hood Container York 113 FTE
NAT-SIZE Valway-Twc-Twc Value Way Dc-Cols Oh 113 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.