Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) · Iowa

Lovewell Fencing, Inc.

Davenport, IA · ~86 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.8
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. runs at 65% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) workplace, earning a grade B.

Lovewell Fencing, Inc.: 1.8 TCR = 65% of Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS 2.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. safety composite

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 53% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 30%), 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).

D

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 1.82 per 100 workers

Safer than 53% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.15 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% 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

Lovewell Fencing, Inc.: 1.1 → 2.1 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 2.2 TCR · DART/TCR 1.18× in 2024

Lovewell Fencing, Inc.'s TCR rose 1.1 from 1.1 in 2021 to 2.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 2.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.18× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238990 · Davenport, IA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 1.8 · 65% of ind

  • DART 2.1 DART
  • RANK #11/25
  • PHOTO Holmes Erection, Inc
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~86 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Holmes Erection, Inc (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Lovewell Fencing, Inc. averages 1.8 TCR (65% of the Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS benchmark).

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

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. TCR series: 2021=1.1 · 2023=2.2 · 2024=2.1 · BLS 2.8

Where Lovewell Fencing, Inc. falls in its industry

1,634 Fencing contractors (except el establishments

Safer than 53% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Iowa alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 25 Fencing contractors (except el employers in Iowa.

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. (86 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 05001,0001,500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Lovewell Fencing, Inc.
Lovewell Fencing, Inc. (86 employees, TCR 1.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Lovewell Fencing, Inc. has more employees than the Fencing contractors (except electronic c median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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 2.1 2.1 2 0 0
2023 2.2 0.0 2 0 0
2021 1.1 1.1 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238990 · IA · Davenport

1,634 Fencing contractors (except electronic containment fencing for pets) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,192 rated employers in Iowa with headcount on file · 284 employers in Davenport, IA · 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 Holmes Erection, Inc 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Chenango Contracting, Inc. 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR BrandSafway, LLC - Omaha Branch 1.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Unique Scaffolding Systems 1.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Hawkeye Paving Corp. 86 FTE
STATE-SIZE Academy Roofing and Sheet Metal of the Midwest Inc. 86 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hometown Plumbing & Heating 86 FTE
STATE-SIZE Soy Plant 86 FTE
CITY-NEAR MercyOne-Genesis, East Hospital-MHS-IA/NE 2,129 FTE
CITY-NEAR Genesis Medical Center East Campus 1,704 FTE
CITY-NEAR John Deere Davenport Works 1,394 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - MLI1 1,353 FTE
NAT-TCR White River Materials, Inc 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Grand Lodge 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR The Blossoms at Cumberland 1.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Fresno CA Yard 1.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Altercare Coshocton 86 FTE
NAT-SIZE Equipment Depot of Illinois Inc. - Itasca 86 FTE
NAT-SIZE Drywall Interiors, LP 86 FTE
NAT-SIZE North Andover, MA 86 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, 2021. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.