Janitorial Services · Georgia

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville

Gainesville, GA · ~51 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.0
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville runs at 22% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Janitorial Services workplace, earning a grade A.

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville: 1.0 TCR = 22% of Janitorial Services BLS 4.5 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville safety composite

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 91% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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).

B

76/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 1 per 100 workers

Safer than 91% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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

−2.1

2019→2022

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville injury rate improved

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville's TCR fell 2.1 from 2.1 in 2019 to 0.0 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2019 at 2.1 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=2.1 · 2020=1.9 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561720 · Gainesville, GA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.0 · 22% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #11/149
  • PHOTO SMS 1363/1408
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~51 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SMS 1363/1408 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville averages 1.0 TCR (22% of the Janitorial Services BLS benchmark).

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

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville TCR series: 2019=2.1 · 2020=1.9 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · BLS 4.5

Where PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville falls in its industry

4,064 Janitorial Services establishments

Safer than 91% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 149 Janitorial Services employers in Georgia.

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville (51 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2 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 02004006008001,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville
PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville (51 employees, TCR 1.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2

PSSI - 0291 Pro View Foods - Gainesville has fewer employees than the Janitorial Services median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.2. 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
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 1.9 1.9 1 0 0
2019 2.1 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561720 · GA · Gainesville

4,064 Janitorial Services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 306 employers in Gainesville, GA · 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 SMS 1363/1408 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ameri-Kleen - Minnesota Branch 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR SODEXO AT ULL EVS 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Scopes Facility Services 1.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Williams Produce, Inc. 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE Corteva 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE THREE NOTCH ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPARATION 51 FTE
STATE-SIZE AGLC Peachtree Service Center 51 FTE
CITY-NEAR Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Inc. 5,384 FTE
CITY-NEAR Kubota Manufacturing of America Corporation 1,863 FTE
CITY-NEAR Poultry Processing 1,546 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mar-Jac Poultry, Inc Processing Plant 1,190 FTE
NAT-TCR PSSI - 0504 Schwans - Deer Park 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Advantech - Milpitas, California 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Hydrodec of North America, LLC. 1.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Best Line Equipment - Harrisburg 1.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE PSSI - 0413 Tyson Foods Inc.- South Hutchinson 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE HG445 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE L&H Threaded Rods Corp. 51 FTE
NAT-SIZE HG470 51 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.