Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Mississippi

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC

Tupelo, MS · ~43 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC runs at 77% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade B.

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC: 2.9 TCR = 77% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC safety composite

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 85% 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

66/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 2.93 per 100 workers

Safer than 85% of industry peers

DART rate
C 2.64 per 100 workers

Safer than 56% 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%).

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC held a steady TCR band

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC's TCR held near 0.3 from 2.9 in 2021 to 2.6 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 3.3 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.9× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=2.9 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=2.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Tupelo, MS AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.9 · 77% of ind

  • DART 2.6 DART
  • RANK #11/29
  • PHOTO The Chapel Grove Inn
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~43 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: The Chapel Grove Inn (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC averages 2.9 TCR (77% 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

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC TCR series: 2021=2.9 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=2.6 · BLS 3.8

Where Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 85% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Mississippi alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 29 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Mississippi.

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC (43 employees, TCR 2.9) 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 Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC
Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC (43 employees, TCR 2.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Magnolia Manor at Tupelo, LLC has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a lower 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
2023 2.6 2.6 1 0 0
2022 3.3 3.3 1 0 0
2021 2.9 2.9 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MS · Tupelo

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 4,083 rated employers in Mississippi with headcount on file · 144 employers in Tupelo, MS · 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 The Chapel Grove Inn 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR 10956 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR EMS- Cherrywood Pte of Plymout 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR 63044 SUNRISE OF NORWOOD 2.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Peco Farms Sebastopol Hatchery 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Coahoma Electric Power Association-Tunica 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE M&M Pipeline Acquisition, LLC dba M&M Pipeline 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Peco Foods- West Point MS 43 FTE
CITY-NEAR North Mississippi Medical Center 5,727 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tupelo Cooper Tire & Rubber Plant (SIC 3011) 1,416 FTE
CITY-NEAR JESCO, Inc. 394 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tupelo Operations 393 FTE
NAT-TCR Stevenson Mill 2.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Washburn University* 2.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Nta, Ltd. 2.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Protocon RM Plant 179 2.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Barker Wire Products, Inc. 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Center S D 58 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dura Mark LLC 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities (47) 43 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: 2023, 2022, 2021. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.