Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · California

Oakwood Village

Auburn, CA · ~44 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
34.1
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Oakwood Village runs at 897% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

Oakwood Village: 34.1 TCR = 897% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Oakwood Village safety composite

Oakwood Village scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 0%), 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

14/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 34.09 per 100 workers

Safer than 0% of industry peers

DART rate
F 20.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

Oakwood Village: 36.6 → 40.8 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 56.6 TCR · DART/TCR 0.6× in 2024

Oakwood Village's TCR rose 4.2 from 36.6 in 2020 to 40.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 56.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.6× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Auburn, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 34.1 · 897% of ind

  • DART 20.4 DART
  • RANK #635/635
  • PHOTO Carlton Senior Livin…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 40 inj
  • SIZE ~44 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Carlton Senior Living Davis (4.2 TCR gap)

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

Oakwood Village in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Oakwood Village averages 34.1 TCR (897% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Oakwood Village TCR series: 2020=36.6 · 2021=13.1 · 2022=45.8 · 2023=56.6 · 2024=40.8 · BLS 3.8

Where Oakwood Village falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 0% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #635 safest of 635 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in California.

Oakwood Village (44 employees, TCR 34.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 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 0100200300 010203040 Average employees Total Case Rate Oakwood Village
Oakwood Village (44 employees, TCR 34.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Oakwood Village has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. 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 40.8 20.4 18 0 0
2023 56.6 54.1 14 8 0
2022 45.8 45.8 1 14 0
2021 13.1 0.0 5 0 0
2020 36.6 34.0 2 12 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · CA · Auburn

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 96 employers in Auburn, CA · 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 Carlton Senior Living Davis 29.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cornerstone Residence of Fosston 29.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Rose Valley Scappoose 29.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Chandler Place Independent Living 29.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Boudin SF - Metro Pointe 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cabrillo Beach 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE La Mesa, Elmcroft of 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mountain View Assisted Living and Memory Care 44 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 37 2,161 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Valley Hospitals (30095) 762 FTE
CITY-NEAR Health and Human Services 743 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Auburn Faith Hospital (110-4001) 676 FTE
NAT-TCR Governor Juan F. Luis Hospital and Medical Center 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 048 Juvenile Detention Center 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Rockland Facility 30.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Kemper Moving Systems 30.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE American Fence Company, LLC 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE Denny's 7741 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE OG&E-Redbud Plant 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE Harborview Elementary 44 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, 2021, 2020. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.