Landscaping services (except planning) · Maryland

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville

Laytonsville, MD · ~236 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
2.0
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville runs at 45% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Landscaping services (except planning) workplace, earning a grade A.

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville: 2.0 TCR = 45% of Landscaping services (except planning) BLS 4.5 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville safety composite

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 80% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 52%), 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

67/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 2.02 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 63% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

−2.4

2016→2024

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville injury rate improved

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville's TCR fell 2.4 from 3.2 in 2016 to 0.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 3.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.38× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.2 · 2017=2.5 · 2018=2.3 · 2019=1.2 · 2020=2.4 · 2021=2.0 · 2022=2.0 · 2023=1.9 · 2024=0.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561730 · Laytonsville, MD AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 2.0 · 45% of ind

  • DART 0.8 DART
  • RANK #5/59
  • PHOTO 173401
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 42 inj
  • SIZE ~236 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 173401 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville averages 2.0 TCR (45% of the Landscaping services (except planning) BLS benchmark).

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

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville TCR series: 2016=3.2 · 2017=2.5 · 2018=2.3 · 2019=1.2 · 2020=2.4 · 2021=2 · 2022=2 · 2023=1.9 · 2024=0.8 · BLS 4.5

Where Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville falls in its industry

2,875 Landscaping services (except p establishments

Safer than 80% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Maryland alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 59 Landscaping services (except p employers in Maryland.

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville (236 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.7 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville
Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville (236 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.7

Ruppert Landscape - Laytonsville has more employees than the Landscaping services (except planning) median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.7. 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 0.8 0.8 2 0 0
2023 1.9 0.9 4 0 0
2022 2.0 0.8 5 0 0
2021 2.0 1.2 5 0 0
2020 2.4 1.2 6 0 0
2019 1.2 0.4 3 0 0
2018 2.3 1.4 5 0 0
2017 2.5 2.0 5 0 0
2016 3.2 0.9 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561730 · MD · Laytonsville

2,875 Landscaping services (except planning) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,213 rated employers in Maryland with headcount on file · 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 173401 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Evergreen Landscape Design 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sepulveda Golf Maint 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Prince George 48520 2.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE EQR 236 FTE
STATE-SIZE MOI Inc. 236 FTE
STATE-SIZE Food Authority Maryland 236 FTE
STATE-SIZE Global Specialty Fulfillment : UMD1 236 FTE
CITY-NEAR GOSHEN ENTERPRISES, INC 30 FTE
NAT-TCR MTM Recognition 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR port everglades terminal 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Greatrex 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Hobbs, NM 2.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Foodservice Missouri - 1002 236 FTE
NAT-SIZE Mosser Construction Inc. 236 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lafayette Regional Health Center 236 FTE
NAT-SIZE Eagle Rock Distributing Co. - Norcross 236 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.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.