Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing · Massachusetts

Riverside Facility

Andover, MA · ~61 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Riverside Facility runs at 22% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Riverside Facility: 0.7 TCR = 22% of Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Riverside Facility safety composite

Riverside Facility 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).

B

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.71 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% 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%).

Riverside Facility held a steady TCR band

Riverside Facility's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 3.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.0 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=3.3 · 2020=1.5 · 2021=1.7 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325413 · Andover, MA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.7 · 22% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #2/13
  • PHOTO ARDx Gurnee J54
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~61 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: ARDx Gurnee J54 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Riverside Facility in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Riverside Facility averages 0.7 TCR (22% of the Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Riverside Facility TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2019=3.3 · 2020=1.5 · 2021=1.7 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Riverside Facility falls in its industry

201 Blood derivative in-vitro diag establishments

Safer than 82% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.4.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 13 Blood derivative in-vitro diag employers in Massachusetts.

Riverside Facility (61 employees, TCR 0.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 120 employees and a TCR of 1.4 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 02,0004,0006,000 01234 Average employees Total Case Rate Riverside Facility
Riverside Facility (61 employees, TCR 0.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 120 employees and a TCR of 1.4

Riverside Facility has fewer employees than the Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic sub median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.4. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 1.7 1.7 1 0 0
2020 1.5 1.5 1 0 0
2019 3.3 3.3 1 1 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325413 · MA · Andover

201 Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 78 employers in Andover, MA · 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 ARDx Gurnee J54 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Mediatech 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR BioMerieux Durham 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR ProteinSimple 0.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE M. Holland & Sons Construction, Inc. 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE P. J. Albert, Inc. 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE 5020 - Halifax, MA 61 FTE
STATE-SIZE Manafort Transit 61 FTE
CITY-NEAR Philips NAM Field Sales & Service 4,812 FTE
CITY-NEAR Raytheon_Andover_MA 4,577 FTE
CITY-NEAR Philips Healthcare 2,279 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pfizer, Inc. 2,276 FTE
NAT-TCR Southern Gas and Supply Inc. 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Gibraltar Packaging Group 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Enhanced Environmental and Emergency Services 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Empire Truck Sales - Biloxi 0.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Accel Group, Inc. 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE Morning Sun Care Center 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kaplan Healthcare Center 61 FTE
NAT-SIZE TCI Fabrication 61 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, 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.