Elementary and secondary schools · Minnesota

River Bend Education District

New Ulm, MN · ~71 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
17.5
Avg TCR
1.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

River Bend Education District runs at 1249% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Elementary and secondary schools workplace, earning a grade F.

River Bend Education District: 17.5 TCR = 1249% of Elementary and secondary schools BLS 1.4 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

River Bend Education District safety composite

River Bend Education District scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 3%), 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

21/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 17.48 per 100 workers

Safer than 3% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.85 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% 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

River Bend Education District: 10.1 → 11.5 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 38.3 TCR · DART/TCR 0.22× in 2024

River Bend Education District's TCR rose 1.4 from 10.1 in 2017 to 11.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 38.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.22× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 611110 · New Ulm, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 17.5 · 1249% of ind

  • DART 3.9 DART
  • RANK #1573/1589
  • PHOTO New Haven Board of E…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 43 inj
  • SIZE ~71 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: New Haven Board of Education - Mauro Sheridan (0.0 TCR gap)

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

River Bend Education District in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows River Bend Education District averages 17.5 TCR (1249% of the Elementary and secondary schools BLS benchmark).

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

River Bend Education District TCR series: 2017=10.1 · 2018=7.1 · 2021=14.5 · 2022=23.4 · 2023=38.3 · 2024=11.5 · BLS 1.4

Where River Bend Education District falls in its industry

3,374 Elementary and secondary schoo establishments

Safer than 3% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1573 safest of 1589 Elementary and secondary schoo employers in Minnesota.

River Bend Education District (71 employees, TCR 17.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 76 employees and a TCR of 3.8 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 02,0004,0006,0008,00010,000 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate River Bend Education District
River Bend Education District (71 employees, TCR 17.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 76 employees and a TCR of 3.8

River Bend Education District has fewer employees than the Elementary and secondary schools median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.8. 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 11.5 3.9 6 0 0
2023 38.3 3.8 10 0 0
2022 23.4 4.7 10 0 0
2021 14.5 1.8 8 0 0
2018 7.1 3.6 4 0 0
2017 10.1 4.0 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

611110 · MN · New Ulm

3,374 Elementary and secondary schools employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 79 employers in New Ulm, MN · 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 New Haven Board of Education - Mauro Sheridan 17.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR New Haven Board of Education - Strong 17.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR New Haven Board of Education - John C. Daniels 17.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Foglia Education Center 17.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Fagen, Inc. 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rochester Office 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Donlar Construction Company 71 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hanson Silo Company 71 FTE
CITY-NEAR J&R Schugel Trucking, Inc. 926 FTE
CITY-NEAR New Ulm 722 FTE
CITY-NEAR New Ulm Medical Center 640 FTE
CITY-NEAR Martin Luther College 441 FTE
NAT-TCR LiveOak Living Community 17.5 TCR
NAT-TCR MW3 17.5 TCR
NAT-TCR SeaQuest Fort Worth 17.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Store 0493 17.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Skanska ECCO III JV / Harmon Yard Stage 2 90007100 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Oswald Wholesale Lumber, Inc. 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Great American Products Ltd 71 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rodriguez Construction Group, Inc. 71 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, 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.