Correctional institutions · Minnesota

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater

Bayport, MN · ~615 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.1
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
1
Fatality
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater runs at 128% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Correctional institutions workplace, earning a grade D.

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater: 4.1 TCR = 128% of Correctional institutions BLS 3.2 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater safety composite

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 65% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 5%), 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

39/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 4.11 per 100 workers

Safer than 65% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.9 per 100 workers

Safer than 33% of industry peers

Fatalities
F 1

Safer than 5% 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

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater: 2.2 → 6.0 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 6.0 TCR · DART/TCR 1.19× in 2018

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater's TCR rose 3.8 from 2.2 in 2017 to 6.0 in 2018. In 2018, DART was 1.19× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 922140 · Bayport, MN ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 4.1 · 128% of ind

  • DART 4.9 DART
  • RANK #13/32
  • PHOTO John H. Baker, Jr., …
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 30 inj
  • SIZE ~615 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: John H. Baker, Jr., Public Safety Center (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater averages 4.1 TCR (128% of the Correctional institutions BLS benchmark).

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

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater TCR series: 2017=2.2 · 2018=6 · BLS 3.2

Where Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater falls in its industry

482 Correctional institutions establishments

Safer than 65% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #13 safest of 32 Correctional institutions employers in Minnesota.

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater (615 employees, TCR 4.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 240 employees and a TCR of 5.8 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 05001,0001,500 010203040 Average employees Total Case Rate Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater
Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater (615 employees, TCR 4.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 240 employees and a TCR of 5.8

Minnesota Department of Corrections- Stillwater has more employees than the Correctional institutions median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.8. 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
2018 6.0 4.9 20 7 1
2017 2.2 1.1 10 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

922140 · MN · Bayport

482 Correctional institutions employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 12 employers in Bayport, MN · 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 John H. Baker, Jr., Public Safety Center 4.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kirkland Correctional Institution 4.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR ELOY DETENTION 4.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR IDOC - 6th District (Lary A. Nelson Center) 4.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Long Prairie Packing 616 FTE
STATE-SIZE Filmtec Corporation 616 FTE
STATE-SIZE Business Service Center 616 FTE
STATE-SIZE CHANHASSEN 614 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bayport Main - CORP 2,823 FTE
CITY-NEAR Minnesota Correctional Facility - Stillwater 460 FTE
CITY-NEAR A.S. King Plant 95 FTE
CITY-NEAR King Gen Plant-PD 83 FTE
NAT-TCR dow circle 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Felton02 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Richardson Methodist Medical Center 4.1 TCR
NAT-TCR FedEx Supply Chain - BD Plainfield 4.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Alorica Beaumont Contact Center 615 FTE
NAT-SIZE COH Police Department 615 FTE
NAT-SIZE KraftHeinz Mason City Iowa 615 FTE
NAT-SIZE Mack Engine Plant 615 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: 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.