Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard · Kansas

Pratt(Love Box), LLC

Wichita, KS · ~217 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Pratt(Love Box), LLC runs at 47% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard workplace, earning a grade A.

Pratt(Love Box), LLC: 1.6 TCR = 47% of Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Pratt(Love Box), LLC safety composite

Pratt(Love Box), LLC scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 71% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 43%), 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).

C

56/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.55 per 100 workers

Safer than 71% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.36 per 100 workers

Safer than 43% 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%).

TCR Δ

−1.3

2016→2022

Pratt(Love Box), LLC injury rate improved

Pratt(Love Box), LLC's TCR fell 1.3 from 3.3 in 2016 to 2.0 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2016 at 3.3 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.88× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.3 · 2017=0.9 · 2018=0.5 · 2019=1.5 · 2020=0.4 · 2021=2.2 · 2022=2.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 322211 · Wichita, KS AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.6 · 47% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #2/6
  • PHOTO St. Joseph Container
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 24 inj
  • SIZE ~217 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: St. Joseph Container (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Pratt(Love Box), LLC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Pratt(Love Box), LLC averages 1.6 TCR (47% of the Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard BLS benchmark).

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

Pratt(Love Box), LLC TCR series: 2016=3.3 · 2017=0.9 · 2018=0.5 · 2019=1.5 · 2020=0.4 · 2021=2.2 · 2022=2 · BLS 3.3

Where Pratt(Love Box), LLC falls in its industry

1,338 Boxes, corrugated and solid fi establishments

Safer than 71% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Kansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 6 Boxes, corrugated and solid fi employers in Kansas.

Pratt(Love Box), LLC (217 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4 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 0123456 Average employees Total Case Rate Pratt(Love Box), LLC
Pratt(Love Box), LLC (217 employees, TCR 1.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 102 employees and a TCR of 2.4

Pratt(Love Box), LLC has more employees than the Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.4. 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
2022 2.0 1.4 6 0 0
2021 2.2 2.2 5 0 0
2020 0.4 0.4 1 0 0
2019 1.5 1.5 3 0 0
2018 0.5 0.0 0 1 0
2017 0.9 0.5 2 0 0
2016 3.3 3.3 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

322211 · KS · Wichita

1,338 Boxes, corrugated and solid fiber, made from purchased paper or paperboard employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 5,228 rated employers in Kansas with headcount on file · 841 employers in Wichita, KS · 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 St. Joseph Container 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR EDMORE, MI 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR MORGANTON, NC 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4173 Atlanta Sheet Feeder 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Shawnee - Main Store 217 FTE
STATE-SIZE Johnsonville- Holton 218 FTE
STATE-SIZE Futamura USA, Inc. 216 FTE
STATE-SIZE VVF Kansas Services 216 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spirit Aerosystems 11,775 FTE
CITY-NEAR Textron Aviation - Mid Continent 4,359 FTE
CITY-NEAR Wesley Medical Center 2,657 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1855-KSWIC062 2,438 FTE
NAT-TCR Gold Strike 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 484 - Delavan 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 682 - Howell-MI 1.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Helen of Troy - Olive Branch 1.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Haas-Anderson Construction, Ltd 217 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gary Amoth Trucking, Inc 217 FTE
NAT-SIZE Stress Engineering Services Inc., Houston, Texas 217 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pinova, Inc 217 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: 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.