Continuing care retirement communities · Pennsylvania

Saint Anne's Retirement Community

Columbia, PA · ~263 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.8
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Saint Anne's Retirement Community runs at 180% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Continuing care retirement communities workplace, earning a grade D.

Saint Anne's Retirement Community: 6.8 TCR = 180% of Continuing care retirement communities BLS 3.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Saint Anne's Retirement Community safety composite

Saint Anne's Retirement Community scores safer than 51% of same-industry peers on total case rate (tcr), blended into one 0-100 breakdown. 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).

D

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 6.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 51% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.32 per 100 workers

Safer than 51% 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%).

TCR Δ

−4.8

2016→2024

Saint Anne's Retirement Community injury rate improved

Saint Anne's Retirement Community's TCR fell 4.8 from 8.7 in 2016 to 3.9 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 13.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.49× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=8.7 · 2018=13.1 · 2019=9.0 · 2020=3.4 · 2021=6.3 · 2022=4.8 · 2023=5.6 · 2024=3.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Columbia, PA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 6.8 · 180% of ind

  • DART 3.3 DART
  • RANK #124/257
  • PHOTO Colonial Oaks Leawood
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 98 inj
  • SIZE ~263 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Colonial Oaks Leawood (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Saint Anne's Retirement Community in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Saint Anne's Retirement Community averages 6.8 TCR (180% of the Continuing care retirement communities BLS benchmark).

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

Saint Anne's Retirement Community TCR series: 2016=8.7 · 2018=13.1 · 2019=9 · 2020=3.4 · 2021=6.3 · 2022=4.8 · 2023=5.6 · 2024=3.9 · BLS 3.8

Where Saint Anne's Retirement Community falls in its industry

4,127 Continuing care retirement com establishments

Safer than 51% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #124 safest of 257 Continuing care retirement com employers in Pennsylvania.

Saint Anne's Retirement Community (263 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 0100200300 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Saint Anne's Retirement Community
Saint Anne's Retirement Community (263 employees, TCR 6.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Saint Anne's Retirement Community has more employees than the Continuing care retirement communities median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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 3.9 3.3 7 0 0
2023 5.6 5.1 10 0 0
2022 4.8 4.8 8 0 0
2021 6.3 5.0 10 0 0
2020 3.4 2.8 6 0 0
2019 9.0 8.5 17 0 0
2018 13.1 13.1 24 0 0
2016 8.7 8.1 16 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · PA · Columbia

4,127 Continuing care retirement communities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 28 employers in Columbia, PA · 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 Colonial Oaks Leawood 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Edencrest at Siena Hills 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Westminster Towers Orlando 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Belmont Village Sunnyvale 6.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE B.J. Baldwin Electric Inc. 263 FTE
STATE-SIZE Multi-color Corporation York 263 FTE
STATE-SIZE General Dynamics-OTS (SCAAP) 263 FTE
STATE-SIZE BlueScope Buildings North America BBNA 263 FTE
CITY-NEAR Anvil International, Columbia Plant 539 FTE
CITY-NEAR ASC Engineered Solutions - (FKA Anvil Int.), Columbia Plant 522 FTE
CITY-NEAR 106566 127 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lancaster 122 FTE
NAT-TCR OBC, Inc. 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Bonnavilla Homes 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR IHG Army Hotels - Fort Knox (Holiday Inn Express/Army Lodging) 6.8 TCR
NAT-TCR La-Z-Boy Midwest Distribution Center 6.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Keytronic R&A 263 FTE
NAT-SIZE Munson Home Care 263 FTE
NAT-SIZE San Francisco 263 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sterling Site Access Solutions, LLC. 263 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, 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.