Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) manufacturing · Missouri

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations

Imperial, MO · ~59 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations runs at 20% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations: 0.7 TCR = 20% of Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations safety composite

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 94% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 38%), 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)
A 0.65 per 100 workers

Safer than 94% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.95 per 100 workers

Safer than 38% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations: 0.0 → 1.9 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 1.9 TCR · DART/TCR 3× in 2021

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations's TCR rose 1.9 from 0.0 in 2019 to 1.9 in 2021. In 2021, DART was 3× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325510 · Imperial, MO AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.7 · 20% of ind

  • DART 1.9 DART
  • RANK #2/14
  • PHOTO US GA Covington Plant
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~59 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: US GA Covington Plant (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations averages 0.7 TCR (20% of the Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations TCR series: 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=1.9 · BLS 3.3

Where Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations falls in its industry

530 Architectural coatings (i.e., establishments

Safer than 94% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Missouri alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 14 Architectural coatings (i.e., employers in Missouri.

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations (59 employees, TCR 0.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 70 employees and a TCR of 2.5 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 0100200300400500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations
Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations (59 employees, TCR 0.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 70 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Masco Coatings Group St. Louis Operations has fewer employees than the Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) man median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.5. 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
2021 1.9 1.9 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325510 · MO · Imperial

530 Architectural coatings (i.e., paint) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,075 rated employers in Missouri with headcount on file · 11 employers in Imperial, MO · 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 US GA Covington Plant 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kelly-Moore Paint Co., Inc., - Corporate Offices & Supporting Services 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ennis-Flint Ennis North 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Dow Chemical Company Charlotte Operations 0.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE KCP&L - Dodson Service Center 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE Western Division 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE Superior Electrical Construction 59 FTE
STATE-SIZE Joplin office 59 FTE
CITY-NEAR Behr Paint Company St. Louis Operations 53 FTE
CITY-NEAR Masco Coatings Group St. Louis MFG 53 FTE
CITY-NEAR Arnold Ready Mix Corp 48 FTE
CITY-NEAR H.W. Herrell Distributing Company 46 FTE
NAT-TCR Middletown RI 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Nouryon, Pulp and Performance Chemicals 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 1823 High Grove 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR JR Automation Technologies, LLC Liberty, SC 0.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Buerkle Acura 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bsvg, LLC Austin 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, Inc. 59 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pipestone Truss 59 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: 2021, 2020, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.