Skilled nursing facilities · Indiana

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis

Indianapolis, IN · ~161 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
5.4
Avg TCR
6.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis runs at 83% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Skilled nursing facilities workplace, earning a grade C.

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis: 5.4 TCR = 83% of Skilled nursing facilities BLS 6.5 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis safety composite

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 61% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

55/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 5.41 per 100 workers

Safer than 61% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.3 per 100 workers

Safer than 52% 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

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis: 3.9 → 7.4 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 10.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.61× in 2021

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis's TCR rose 3.5 from 3.9 in 2016 to 7.4 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2020 at 10.0 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.61× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623110 · Indianapolis, IN AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 5.4 · 83% of ind

  • DART 3.3 DART
  • RANK #247/640
  • PHOTO MADISON POINTE CARE …
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 30 inj
  • SIZE ~161 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: MADISON POINTE CARE CENTER (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis averages 5.4 TCR (83% of the Skilled nursing facilities BLS benchmark).

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

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis TCR series: 2016=3.9 · 2017=4.5 · 2018=2.9 · 2019=3.7 · 2020=10 · 2021=7.4 · BLS 6.5

Where Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis falls in its industry

15,252 Skilled nursing facilities establishments

Safer than 61% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Indiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #247 safest of 640 Skilled nursing facilities employers in Indiana.

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis (161 employees, TCR 5.4) 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 Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis
Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis (161 employees, TCR 5.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 106 employees and a TCR of 6.6

Rosewalk Village of Indianapolis has more employees than the Skilled nursing facilities median and a lower 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
2021 7.4 3.3 7 2 0
2020 10.0 7.5 2 10 0
2019 3.7 3.0 5 0 0
2018 2.9 0.7 4 0 0
2017 4.5 3.8 6 0 0
2016 3.9 3.2 6 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623110 · IN · Indianapolis

15,252 Skilled nursing facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,750 rated employers in Indiana with headcount on file · 2,074 employers in Indianapolis, IN · 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 MADISON POINTE CARE CENTER 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sandy Ridge Health and Rehab 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Georgian Gardens Center for Rehab and Healthcare 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Shelby Pointe 5.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Clarks Hill 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lakeside Book Company - Kendallville Digital 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE SunCoke Energy Indiana Harbor Operation 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE Functional Devices, Inc. 161 FTE
CITY-NEAR Indiana University Health, Inc 7,874 FTE
CITY-NEAR Methodist Hospital 6,862 FTE
CITY-NEAR Eli Lilly - Lilly Corp Center 6,482 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lilly Technology Center 6,472 FTE
NAT-TCR TFI 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Best Fender Products 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Store 2184 5.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Swanton Health Care & Retirement Center 5.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Polyone Seabrook TX 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE DeWitt 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE Welcome Tube 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE Unicep Packaging, Spokane 161 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: 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.