Public probation offices · Michigan

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit

Detroit, MI · ~51 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
0.0
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit runs at 0% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Public probation offices workplace, earning a grade C.

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit: 0.0 TCR = 0% of Public probation offices BLS 3.2 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit safety composite

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 100% 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).

B

81/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 100% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% 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%).

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit held a steady TCR band

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2017 at 0.0 TCR.

2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 922150 · Detroit, MI AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 0.0 · 0% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #0/15
  • PHOTO Cook County Juvenile…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 0 inj
  • SIZE ~51 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Cook County Juvenile Probation - Chicago (0.2 TCR gap)

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

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit averages 0.0 TCR (0% of the Public probation offices BLS benchmark).

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

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · BLS 3.2

Where Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit falls in its industry

81 Public probation offices establishments

Safer than 100% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #0 safest of 15 Public probation offices employers in Michigan.

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit (51 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 3.4 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 05001,0001,5002,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit
Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit (51 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 3.4

Michigan Department of Corrections - Court Services Unit has fewer employees than the Public probation offices median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.4. 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
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

922150 · MI · Detroit

81 Public probation offices employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 673 employers in Detroit, MI · 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 Cook County Juvenile Probation - Chicago 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR County Probation 0.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR DOCCR-Admin and Field Services 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Probation Santa Ana Office 0.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Specailty Tubes, LLC dba Beverlin Manufacturing 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fairlane Dialysis 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE VISTA SPRINGS AT NORTHVIEW 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE Intelligent Management Solutions 51 FTE
CITY-NEAR Henry Ford Hospital 8,838 FTE
CITY-NEAR Detroit Campus 8,632 FTE
CITY-NEAR Delta Air Lines - DTW 6,640 FTE
CITY-NEAR General Motors Corporation 5,241 FTE
NAT-TCR Binghamton 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Port Chester 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Richmond East 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR NY-03 0.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Advanced Lighting Concepts, LLC. 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE Quality Stone Veneer Inc., Tower City Manufacturing 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE St. Mark Village Assisted Living Center 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE Comfort Systems USA Indiana 51 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: 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.