Food concession contractors (e.g., convention facilities, entertainment facilities, sporting facilities) · California

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium

Pasadena, CA · ~67 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.0
Avg TCR
3.0
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium runs at 66% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Food concession contractors (e.g., convention facilities, entertainment facilities, sporting facilities) workplace, earning a grade B.

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium: 2.0 TCR = 66% of Food concession contractors (e.g., convention facilities, entertainment facilities, sporting facilities) BLS 3.0 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium safety composite

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 74% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

67/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.99 per 100 workers

Safer than 74% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 70% 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

−6.0

2016→2018

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium injury rate improved

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium's TCR fell 6.0 from 6.0 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2016 at 6.0 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=6.0 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 722310 · Pasadena, CA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.0 · 66% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #104/586
  • PHOTO SODEXO AT CONNORS ST…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~67 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SODEXO AT CONNORS STATE COLLEGE (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium averages 2.0 TCR (66% of the Food concession contractors (e.g., convention facilities, entertainment facilities, sporting facilities) BLS benchmark).

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

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium TCR series: 2016=6 · 2017=0 · 2018=0 · BLS 3.0

Where Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium falls in its industry

6,952 Food concession contractors (e establishments

Safer than 74% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #104 safest of 586 Food concession contractors (e employers in California.

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium (67 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium
Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium (67 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 43 employees and a TCR of 3.5

Legends - Rose Bowl Stadium has more employees than the Food concession contractors (e.g., conve median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 6.0 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

722310 · CA · Pasadena

6,952 Food concession contractors (e.g., convention facilities, entertainment facilities, sporting facilities) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 195 employers in Pasadena, CA · 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 SODEXO AT CONNORS STATE COLLEGE 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR SODEXO AT SANTA ROSA COUNTY S.B. 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR SODEXO AT EVERGLADES COLLEGE DBA KEISER 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR UWL - STUDENT CENTER 2.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sonoma GVIC Ranches 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE MUGU RANCH PARTNERSHIP 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE Travaille and Phippen, Inc. 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE Nurseries 67 FTE
CITY-NEAR ACCO Engineered Systems 4,604 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2313-00000001 4,175 FTE
CITY-NEAR City of Pasadena 2,397 FTE
CITY-NEAR Huntington Hospital 2,228 FTE
NAT-TCR South TX Div/Dist Offc New Brn ENNB 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR PSC Industrial Outsourcing, LP-BPT 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Topeka (Kstop) 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Midwest Scrap Management PC 2.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE 505 Nicollet MNN3 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE HBSHSENC20 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE 6400-Swy 0019 1223 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE Oldcastle OPI - Stone Mountain 67 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: 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.