Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) · Montana

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch

Kalispell, MT · ~29 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.4
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch runs at 194% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) workplace, earning a grade D.

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch: 5.4 TCR = 194% of Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS 2.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch safety composite

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 20%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% 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

−3.2

2022→2024

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch injury rate improved

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch's TCR fell 3.2 from 6.6 in 2022 to 3.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 6.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=6.6 · 2023=6.4 · 2024=3.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238990 · Kalispell, MT ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 5.4 · 194% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #10/10
  • PHOTO 4382_9009
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~29 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 4382_9009 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Montana Fence Great Falls Branch averages 5.4 TCR (194% of the Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS benchmark).

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

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch TCR series: 2022=6.6 · 2023=6.4 · 2024=3.4 · BLS 2.8

Where Montana Fence Great Falls Branch falls in its industry

1,634 Fence installation (except ele establishments

Safer than 20% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Montana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 10 Fence installation (except ele employers in Montana.

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch (29 employees, TCR 5.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 05001,0001,500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Montana Fence Great Falls Branch
Montana Fence Great Falls Branch (29 employees, TCR 5.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Montana Fence Great Falls Branch has fewer employees than the Fence installation (except electronic co median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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
2024 3.4 0.0 1 0 0
2023 6.4 3.2 2 0 0
2022 6.6 3.3 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238990 · MT · Kalispell

1,634 Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 1,536 rated employers in Montana with headcount on file · 117 employers in Kalispell, MT · 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 4382_9009 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nagle Athletic Surfaces, Inc. 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Shop 5.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR InProduction 5.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Somont Oil 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ace Roofing LLC 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE Montana HVAC 29 FTE
STATE-SIZE 2350-Lilienthal Insulation Company 29 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kalispell Regional Medical Center 2,715 FTE
CITY-NEAR Logan Health Medical Center (formerly Kalispell Regional Medical Center) 2,601 FTE
CITY-NEAR Logan Health (formerly Kalispell Regional Healthcare-System) 494 FTE
CITY-NEAR MTK01, Applied Materials, Semi Tool Main 406 FTE
NAT-TCR East Moline 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Oshkosh West 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR VR Concrete, LLC - Columbia 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Apache Sands Service Center Inc 5.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Tazewell Grants 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Geometrix 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hampshire 29 FTE
NAT-SIZE Twin State Inc. 29 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.