Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carrier · Minnesota

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees

Minneapolis, MN · ~233 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
2.0
Avg TCR
0.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees runs at 400% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carrier workplace, earning a grade F.

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees: 2.0 TCR = 400% of Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carrier BLS 0.5 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees safety composite

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 11%), 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).

F

22/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% of industry peers

DART rate
F 0.69 per 100 workers

Safer than 14% 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

−0.6

2023→2024

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees injury rate improved

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees's TCR fell 0.6 from 2.3 in 2023 to 1.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 2.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.34× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2023=2.3 · 2024=1.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 524114 · Minneapolis, MN ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 2.0 · 400% of ind

  • DART 0.7 DART
  • RANK #40/41
  • PHOTO Central California A…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~233 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Central California Alliance for Health Merced (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees averages 2.0 TCR (400% of the Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carrier BLS benchmark).

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

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees TCR series: 2023=2.3 · 2024=1.7 · BLS 0.5

Where Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees falls in its industry

162 Direct Health and Medical Insu establishments

Safer than 11% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 0.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #40 safest of 41 Direct Health and Medical Insu employers in Minnesota.

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees (233 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 360 employees and a TCR of 0.5 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 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees
Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees (233 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 360 employees and a TCR of 0.5

Mn999 Mn Field Based Employees has fewer employees than the Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carr median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 0.5. 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 1.7 0.7 5 0 0
2023 2.3 0.8 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

524114 · MN · Minneapolis

162 Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carrier employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 1,321 employers in Minneapolis, 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 Central California Alliance for Health Merced 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR BCBSNC Fayetteville 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR CAHPADM01 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR UHA Health Insurance 1.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Linden MNE1 233 FTE
STATE-SIZE Olympic Companies of MN 233 FTE
STATE-SIZE Precision Optics 233 FTE
STATE-SIZE 0694 - Woodbury Valley Creek Plaza 233 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Twin Cities 22,522 FTE
CITY-NEAR MN950 MN TELECOMMUTER 12,021 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0501 - City Center 8,459 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hennepin County Medical Center 7,030 FTE
NAT-TCR STR0613 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR The Ruhlin Company 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR STK Electronics, Inc. DBA Pelco Component Technologies 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 229 Edwardsville 2.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Ralph Lauren Corporation - Beechwood Distribution Center 233 FTE
NAT-SIZE Medfleet LLC 233 FTE
NAT-SIZE Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital of North Tampa 233 FTE
NAT-SIZE Port Charlotte Rehabilitation Center 233 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.