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

Quality Care of Howell

Howell, MI · ~23 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.0
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Quality Care of Howell runs at 131% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade D.

Quality Care of Howell: 5.0 TCR = 131% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Quality Care of Howell safety composite

Quality Care of Howell scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 84% 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).

C

70/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 4.99 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% 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

2018→2024

Quality Care of Howell injury rate improved

Quality Care of Howell's TCR fell 1.3 from 8.0 in 2018 to 6.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 67.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=8.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=67.3 · 2022=61.1 · 2023=10.3 · 2024=6.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Howell, MI ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 5.0 · 131% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #76/201
  • PHOTO Treeo Senior Living
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~23 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Treeo Senior Living (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Quality Care of Howell in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Quality Care of Howell averages 5.0 TCR (131% 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 2026-08-25

Quality Care of Howell TCR series: 2018=8 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=67.3 · 2022=61.1 · 2023=10.3 · 2024=6.7 · BLS 3.8

Where Quality Care of Howell falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 69% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #76 safest of 201 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Michigan.

Quality Care of Howell (23 employees, TCR 5.0) 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 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Quality Care of Howell
Quality Care of Howell (23 employees, TCR 5.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

Quality Care of Howell has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a lower 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 6.7 0.0 2 0 0
2023 10.3 0.0 2 0 0
2022 61.1 61.1 0 11 0
2021 67.3 67.3 0 14 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 8.0 8.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MI · Howell

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 94 employers in Howell, MI · 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 Treeo Senior Living 5.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Windsor Manor Assisted Living Community Vinton 5.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Arlington Place of Oelwein 5.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Culpepper Garden 5.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Black Gold Farms - MIS 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE Casey Woodwyk, Inc. 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE John Schuring, Jr. Company 23 FTE
STATE-SIZE Atwood Timber and Lumber 23 FTE
CITY-NEAR Thai Summit America 797 FTE
CITY-NEAR Livingston County 721 FTE
CITY-NEAR Saint Joseph Mercy Livingston Hospital 708 FTE
CITY-NEAR Trinity Health St. Joseph Mercy Livingston 488 FTE
NAT-TCR Never Summer Industries 5.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Saf-Cut Concrete Cutting Inc 5.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Runnings of Putnam 5.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Robinson Machine Company 5.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lowell Corporation 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE 2nd Home Newark 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE Builder Design Center - AZ 23 FTE
NAT-SIZE Forde Nursery Inc 23 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, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.