Colleges, universities, and professional schools · Minnesota

Martin Luther College

New Ulm, MN · ~441 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
3.5
Avg TCR
1.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Martin Luther College runs at 246% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Colleges, universities, and professional schools workplace, earning a grade F.

Martin Luther College: 3.5 TCR = 246% of Colleges, universities, and professional schools BLS 1.4 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Martin Luther College safety composite

Martin Luther College scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 16%), 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

37/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.45 per 100 workers

Safer than 16% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.51 per 100 workers

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

Martin Luther College: 2.5 → 3.6 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 5.2 TCR · DART/TCR 0.15× in 2024

Martin Luther College's TCR rose 1.1 from 2.5 in 2017 to 3.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 5.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.15× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 611310 · New Ulm, MN ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 3.5 · 246% of ind

  • DART 0.5 DART
  • RANK #38/47
  • PHOTO Universidad Ana G. M…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 49 inj
  • SIZE ~441 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Universidad Ana G. Mendez - Bayamon (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Martin Luther College in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Martin Luther College averages 3.5 TCR (246% of the Colleges, universities, and professional schools BLS benchmark).

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

Martin Luther College TCR series: 2017=2.5 · 2018=5 · 2019=3.1 · 2020=0.5 · 2021=5.2 · 2022=3.1 · 2023=4.6 · 2024=3.6 · BLS 1.4

Where Martin Luther College falls in its industry

347 Colleges, universities, and pr establishments

Safer than 16% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #38 safest of 47 Colleges, universities, and pr employers in Minnesota.

Martin Luther College (441 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 617 employees and a TCR of 1.5 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 02,0004,0006,0008,00010,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Martin Luther College
Martin Luther College (441 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 617 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Martin Luther College has fewer employees than the Colleges, universities, and professional median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.5. 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 3.6 0.5 7 0 0
2023 4.6 1.5 9 0 0
2022 3.1 0.5 6 0 0
2021 5.2 2.1 7 3 0
2020 0.5 0.0 1 0 0
2019 3.1 0.0 4 2 0
2018 5.0 0.5 10 0 0
2017 2.5 0.0 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

611310 · MN · New Ulm

347 Colleges, universities, and professional schools employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 79 employers in New Ulm, 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 Universidad Ana G. Mendez - Bayamon 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR William Jewell College 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wesley Woods Geriatric Hosp 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Medical University of South Carolina 3.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Cabinetworks Group 441 FTE
STATE-SIZE St Louis Pk Specialty Ctr 3931 441 FTE
STATE-SIZE Minneapolis Office 440 FTE
STATE-SIZE Graco Inc. - Russell Gray Technical Center 442 FTE
CITY-NEAR J&R Schugel Trucking, Inc. 926 FTE
CITY-NEAR New Ulm 722 FTE
CITY-NEAR New Ulm Medical Center 640 FTE
CITY-NEAR J&R Schugel Trucking, Inc. - MN 333 FTE
NAT-TCR Ocado Solutions USA Aurora 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Meridian Waste North Carolina - Goldston Hauling 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Everidge, LLC Covesville 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Surgery Center of Lancaster 3.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Steel Dynamics Roanoke Bar Division 441 FTE
NAT-SIZE Watts Water Technologies 441 FTE
NAT-SIZE James G Davis Construction Corporation 441 FTE
NAT-SIZE Carrollton Regional Medical Center 441 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.