Homes for the aged with nursing care · Michigan

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park

Novi, MI · ~81 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
13.4
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park runs at 206% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Homes for the aged with nursing care workplace, earning a grade F.

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park: 13.4 TCR = 206% of Homes for the aged with nursing care BLS 6.5 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park safety composite

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 15%), 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

34/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 13.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 15% of industry peers

DART rate
D 4.19 per 100 workers

Safer than 43% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% 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

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park: 4.3 → 6.3 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 29.6 TCR · DART/TCR 0.31× in 2023

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park's TCR rose 2.0 from 4.3 in 2021 to 6.3 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2022 at 29.6 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.31× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Novi, MI ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 13.4 · 206% of ind

  • DART 4.2 DART
  • RANK #393/471
  • PHOTO Danville Hawthorne Inn
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~81 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Danville Hawthorne Inn (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Rose Senior Living at Providence Park averages 13.4 TCR (206% of the Homes for the aged with nursing care BLS benchmark).

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

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park TCR series: 2021=4.3 · 2022=29.6 · 2023=6.3 · BLS 6.5

Where Rose Senior Living at Providence Park falls in its industry

15,252 Homes for the aged with nursin establishments

Safer than 15% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #393 safest of 471 Homes for the aged with nursin employers in Michigan.

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park (81 employees, TCR 13.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Rose Senior Living at Providence Park
Rose Senior Living at Providence Park (81 employees, TCR 13.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Rose Senior Living at Providence Park has fewer employees than the Homes for the aged with nursing care median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.6. 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
2023 6.3 4.2 3 0 0
2022 29.6 29.6 4 12 0
2021 4.3 4.3 1 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · MI · Novi

15,252 Homes for the aged with nursing care employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 182 employers in Novi, 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 Danville Hawthorne Inn 13.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Palisades Living Center 13.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Country View 13.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sycamore Run 13.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Pioneer HI-BRED INTL INC, Constantine MI 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Gas Construction Flint 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE Detroit International Holding 81 FTE
STATE-SIZE TCCo-MI 81 FTE
CITY-NEAR 640564 4,630 FTE
CITY-NEAR MIDET202 ASCENSION PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL NOVI 1,707 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1855-MIDET202 1,564 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novi - Farmington Hills, MI 1,012 FTE
NAT-TCR Valley Dairy Restaurant #5 13.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Shurmer Place Memory Assisted Living 13.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Incamb-O-D-Rw Cambridge City 13.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Couco Creek Dairy, Inc 13.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Essendant: Miami OE 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Henry Clay Blvd (Hcb1)-Ny87 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE Forum Communications Printing - Detroit Lakes 81 FTE
NAT-SIZE DMR Mechanical LLC 81 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: 2023, 2022, 2021. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.