Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities · New Jersey

Mt. Arlington Senior Living

Mt. Arlington, NJ · ~71 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.1
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Mt. Arlington Senior Living runs at 240% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Mt. Arlington Senior Living: 9.1 TCR = 240% of Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS 3.8 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Mt. Arlington Senior Living safety composite

Mt. Arlington Senior Living scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 35%), 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

40/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 9.11 per 100 workers

Safer than 35% of industry peers

DART rate
D 4.71 per 100 workers

Safer than 39% 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

Mt. Arlington Senior Living: 1.8 → 14.1 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 26.1 TCR · DART/TCR 0.52× in 2021

Mt. Arlington Senior Living's TCR rose 12.4 from 1.8 in 2017 to 14.1 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2020 at 26.1 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.52× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Mt. Arlington, NJ ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 9.1 · 240% of ind

  • DART 4.7 DART
  • RANK #53/92
  • PHOTO Villa of Wolfforth
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 13 inj
  • SIZE ~71 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Villa of Wolfforth (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Mt. Arlington Senior Living in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Mt. Arlington Senior Living averages 9.1 TCR (240% of the Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Mt. Arlington Senior Living TCR series: 2017=1.8 · 2018=0 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=26.1 · 2021=14.1 · BLS 3.8

Where Mt. Arlington Senior Living falls in its industry

4,127 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 35% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #53 safest of 92 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in New Jersey.

Mt. Arlington Senior Living (71 employees, TCR 9.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Mt. Arlington Senior Living
Mt. Arlington Senior Living (71 employees, TCR 9.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Mt. Arlington Senior Living has more employees than the Assisted-living facilities with on-site median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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
2021 14.1 4.7 5 1 0
2020 26.1 15.2 5 7 0
2019 3.6 3.6 2 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 1.8 1.8 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · NJ · Mt. Arlington

4,127 Assisted-living facilities with on-site nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 3 employers in Mt. Arlington, NJ · 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 Villa of Wolfforth 9.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Silverado Bee Cave - 462 9.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Overland Park Place 9.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Atrium Assisted Living 9.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Columbia Care New Jersey LLC.-Vineland 2 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE ISE Farms, Inc. 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE March Associates Construction, Inc. 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Henkels & McCoy, Inc - Farmingdale, NJ 71 FTE
CITY-NEAR Blue Diamond Disposal Inc 109 FTE
CITY-NEAR MTA-MRG 68 FTE
NAT-TCR LAS Las Vegas - 4100 9.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Wave Crest Health and Rehabiltiation Center 9.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Wisconsin Metal Fab, LLC 9.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Valley View Assisted Living and Memory Care 9.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE The Thomas Monahan Company 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Alden Meadow Park Rehab and Healthcare 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE TraMar Contracting Inc 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Aiken Pest Control, Inc 71 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: 2021, 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.