Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) · Arkansas

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant

Fort Smith, AR · ~689 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant runs at 172% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) workplace, earning a grade D.

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant: 5.7 TCR = 172% of Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant safety composite

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 54% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 13%), 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

28/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.67 per 100 workers

Safer than 26% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.54 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 54% 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%).

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant held a steady TCR band

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant's TCR held near 0.2 from 5.8 in 2017 to 5.5 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2017 at 5.8 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.8× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=5.8 · 2018=5.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311615 · Fort Smith, AR ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 5.7 · 172% of ind

  • DART 4.5 DART
  • RANK #49/69
  • PHOTO Ambassador Sanitatio…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 83 inj
  • SIZE ~689 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Ambassador Sanitation Management @ Pilgrim's Pride (0.0 TCR gap)

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

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant averages 5.7 TCR (172% of the Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) BLS benchmark).

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

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant TCR series: 2017=5.8 · 2018=5.5 · BLS 3.3

Where OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant falls in its industry

509 Chickens, processing, fresh, f establishments

Safer than 26% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arkansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #49 safest of 69 Chickens, processing, fresh, f employers in Arkansas.

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant (689 employees, TCR 5.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant
OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant (689 employees, TCR 5.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 619 employees and a TCR of 3.5

OKF Fort Smith Reed Lane Plant has more employees than the Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, can median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.5. 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
2018 5.5 4.5 39 5 0
2017 5.8 4.9 44 2 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311615 · AR · Fort Smith

509 Chickens, processing, fresh, frozen, canned, or cooked (except baby and pet food) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 4,393 rated employers in Arkansas with headcount on file · 249 employers in Fort Smith, AR · 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 Ambassador Sanitation Management @ Pilgrim's Pride 5.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cooper Farms Cooked Meats 5.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lincoln Premium Poultry 5.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR OKF Transportation 5.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Glad Manufacturing 688 FTE
STATE-SIZE NATIONAL PARK MEDICAL CENTER 690 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ashdown 691 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fort Smith - 5711 RS Boreham Jr Street 687 FTE
CITY-NEAR MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH 1,944 FTE
CITY-NEAR ABB Motors and Mechanical, Inc. - Fort Smith 1,298 FTE
CITY-NEAR Fort Smith - 5713 RS Boreham Jr Street 985 FTE
CITY-NEAR Baptist Health Medical Center - Fort Smith 970 FTE
NAT-TCR Olson's Greenhouse of Colorado, LLC 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Glade Run Services 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Troy CVA 5.7 TCR
NAT-TCR DATTCO - Trumbull 5.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Autoglassnow LLC 689 FTE
NAT-SIZE Atlantic Coast Enterprises, LLC 689 FTE
NAT-SIZE 5183 Knoxville Assembly 689 FTE
NAT-SIZE 2904-ASM-GA 689 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.