Homes for the elderly with nursing care · Arkansas

Methodist Village Senior Living

Fort Smith, AR · ~204 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
6.3
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Methodist Village Senior Living runs at 96% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Homes for the elderly with nursing care workplace, earning a grade C.

Methodist Village Senior Living: 6.3 TCR = 96% of Homes for the elderly with nursing care BLS 6.5 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Methodist Village Senior Living safety composite

Methodist Village Senior Living scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 63% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

56/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.25 per 100 workers

Safer than 53% of industry peers

DART rate
C 2.3 per 100 workers

Safer than 63% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Methodist Village Senior Living: 5.5 → 6.1 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 8.8 TCR · DART/TCR 0.37× in 2024

Methodist Village Senior Living's TCR rose 0.7 from 5.5 in 2021 to 6.1 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 8.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.37× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Fort Smith, AR AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 6.3 · 96% of ind

  • DART 2.3 DART
  • RANK #87/198
  • PHOTO Corporate Office
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 24 inj
  • SIZE ~204 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Corporate Office (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Methodist Village Senior Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Methodist Village Senior Living averages 6.3 TCR (96% of the Homes for the elderly with nursing care BLS benchmark).

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

Methodist Village Senior Living TCR series: 2021=5.5 · 2022=8.8 · 2023=4.6 · 2024=6.1 · BLS 6.5

Where Methodist Village Senior Living falls in its industry

15,252 Homes for the elderly with nur establishments

Safer than 53% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arkansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #87 safest of 198 Homes for the elderly with nur employers in Arkansas.

Methodist Village Senior Living (204 employees, TCR 6.3) 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Methodist Village Senior Living
Methodist Village Senior Living (204 employees, TCR 6.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Methodist Village Senior Living has more employees than the Homes for the elderly with nursing care median and a lower 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 6.1 2.3 7 1 0
2023 4.6 0.0 0 7 0
2022 8.8 6.4 10 1 0
2021 5.5 2.0 7 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · AR · Fort Smith

15,252 Homes for the elderly with nursing care employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 4,393 rated employers in Arkansas with headcount on file · 249 employers in Fort Smith, AR · 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 Corporate Office 6.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wellbridge of Fenton 6.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sturgeon Bay Health Services 6.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR PAL Mesa LLC 6.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE J.V. Manufacturing, Inc. 204 FTE
STATE-SIZE Clarksville - 1 Boreham Drive 204 FTE
STATE-SIZE Robert Bosch Power Tools West Memphis 204 FTE
STATE-SIZE 296 204 FTE
CITY-NEAR MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH 1,944 FTE
CITY-NEAR ABB Motors and Mechanical, Inc. - Fort Smith 1,298 FTE
CITY-NEAR Fort Smith - 5713 RS Boreham Jr Street 985 FTE
CITY-NEAR Baptist Health Medical Center - Fort Smith 970 FTE
NAT-TCR Store 8763 - Transitown Plaza 6.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Amazon.com Services LLC - DCK1 6.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Sturgeon Bay Health Services 6.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Encompass Health Fredericksburg 6.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE United Regional Physician's Group 204 FTE
NAT-SIZE Nine Line Apparel 204 FTE
NAT-SIZE Teledyne Storm Microwave 204 FTE
NAT-SIZE Berkeley Global Non-Wovens 204 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.