Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) · New Jersey

Masonic Charity foundation

Burlington, NJ · ~401 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
7.0
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
1
Fatality
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Masonic Charity foundation runs at 108% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) workplace, earning a grade C.

Masonic Charity foundation: 7.0 TCR = 108% of Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) BLS 6.5 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Masonic Charity foundation safety composite

Masonic Charity foundation scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 82% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 1%), 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

47/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 7.04 per 100 workers

Safer than 46% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% of industry peers

Fatalities
F 1

Safer than 1% 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

−21.9

2020→2024

Masonic Charity foundation injury rate improved

Masonic Charity foundation's TCR fell 21.9 from 21.9 in 2020 to 0.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 21.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.01× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2020=21.9 · 2021=13.1 · 2022=0.1 · 2023=0.1 · 2024=0.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Burlington, NJ ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 7.0 · 108% of ind

  • DART 0.1 DART
  • RANK #177/370
  • PHOTO Braden River Rehabil…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 107 inj
  • SIZE ~401 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Braden River Rehabilitation Center (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Masonic Charity foundation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Masonic Charity foundation averages 7.0 TCR (108% of the Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-09-26

Masonic Charity foundation TCR series: 2020=21.9 · 2021=13.1 · 2022=0.1 · 2023=0.1 · 2024=0.1 · BLS 6.5

Where Masonic Charity foundation falls in its industry

15,252 Convalescent homes or convales establishments

Safer than 46% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #177 safest of 370 Convalescent homes or convales employers in New Jersey.

Masonic Charity foundation (401 employees, TCR 7.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6 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 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Masonic Charity foundation
Masonic Charity foundation (401 employees, TCR 7.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Masonic Charity foundation has more employees than the Convalescent homes or convalescent hospi median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.6. 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 0.1 0.1 16 5 0
2023 0.1 0.1 19 1 0
2022 0.1 0.1 16 4 0
2021 13.1 13.1 33 3 0
2020 21.9 20.5 23 83 1

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · NJ · Burlington

15,252 Convalescent homes or convalescent hospitals (except psychiatric) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 101 employers in Burlington, NJ · 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 Braden River Rehabilitation Center 7.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lakeside Nursing Center 7.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hillcrest Home 7.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR St. Clara's Manor 7.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE WM 2003 401 FTE
STATE-SIZE LBF - HQ 401 FTE
STATE-SIZE TheKey - NJ, Mountainside (1450 US-22) 400 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lowenstein Sandler Roseland 400 FTE
CITY-NEAR COMPASSIONATE CARE HOSPICE GROUP LTD. 1,470 FTE
CITY-NEAR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : ACY2 1,426 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - ACY2 1,055 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - ACY8 658 FTE
NAT-TCR Overhead Door Burlington 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Logansport Distribution Center 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Kramer Foods 7.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Bellevue Ne - 3109 7.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Citywide Mobile Response Corp 401 FTE
NAT-SIZE Ingersoll Cutting Tool Company Inc 401 FTE
NAT-SIZE Valley On Columbia 401 FTE
NAT-SIZE MHI RJ Aviation Inc. - Tucson Service Center 401 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.