Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities · California

Mercy Retirement and Care Center

Oakland, CA · ~174 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.7
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Mercy Retirement and Care Center runs at 175% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade D.

Mercy Retirement and Care Center: 6.7 TCR = 175% of Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS 3.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Mercy Retirement and Care Center safety composite

Mercy Retirement and Care Center scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 44%), 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

49/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.65 per 100 workers

Safer than 52% of industry peers

DART rate
D 4.07 per 100 workers

Safer than 44% 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%).

TCR Δ

−3.6

2017→2019

Mercy Retirement and Care Center injury rate improved

Mercy Retirement and Care Center's TCR fell 3.6 from 7.7 in 2017 to 4.1 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2018 at 8.2 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.61× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=7.7 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=4.1

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Oakland, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 6.7 · 175% of ind

  • DART 4.1 DART
  • RANK #67/216
  • PHOTO CRISTA SHORES RETIRE…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 24 inj
  • SIZE ~174 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: CRISTA SHORES RETIREMENT COMMUNITY (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Mercy Retirement and Care Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Mercy Retirement and Care Center averages 6.7 TCR (175% of the Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Mercy Retirement and Care Center TCR series: 2017=7.7 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=4.1 · BLS 3.8

Where Mercy Retirement and Care Center falls in its industry

4,127 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 52% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #67 safest of 216 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in California.

Mercy Retirement and Care Center (174 employees, TCR 6.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Mercy Retirement and Care Center
Mercy Retirement and Care Center (174 employees, TCR 6.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Mercy Retirement and Care Center has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities with on-site median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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
2019 4.1 4.1 5 0 0
2018 8.2 6.5 10 0 0
2017 7.7 4.6 9 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · CA · Oakland

4,127 Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 458 employers in Oakland, CA · 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 CRISTA SHORES RETIREMENT COMMUNITY 6.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Meadowbrook 6.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Chandler Place 6.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Westlake Hills 6.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Gill Ranch 174 FTE
STATE-SIZE JTS Modular Inc. 174 FTE
STATE-SIZE MCE Corporation 174 FTE
STATE-SIZE American Asphalt 174 FTE
CITY-NEAR Oakland Unified School District 4,473 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2032-02120301 4,408 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0206-02620301 3,210 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2032-02620301 2,922 FTE
NAT-TCR Terminix Service, Inc. Waynesville 64- 30 6.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 279 - Mays Landing 6.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Dallas - 605 6.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Spokane Wa/Intermountain District 6.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Van Buren Charter Township 174 FTE
NAT-SIZE Qure Medical - Sturtevant 174 FTE
NAT-SIZE Comm HVAC NA and EMEA : MFG-Rushville, IN-USA 174 FTE
NAT-SIZE Collections Systems Maintenance Division 174 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: 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.