Facilities Support Services · California

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne

La Verne, CA · ~55 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.2
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne runs at 7% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Facilities Support Services workplace, earning a grade A.

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne: 0.2 TCR = 7% of Facilities Support Services BLS 2.6 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne safety composite

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 98% 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).

B

79/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.18 per 100 workers

Safer than 98% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 77% 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%).

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne held a steady TCR band

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2019 to 0.0 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2021 at 0.5 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=0.0 · 2021=0.5 · 2022=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561210 · La Verne, CA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.2 · 7% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/69
  • PHOTO Bureau of Disability…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~55 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bureau of Disability Determination Services (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne averages 0.2 TCR (7% of the Facilities Support Services BLS benchmark).

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

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne TCR series: 2019=0 · 2021=0.5 · 2022=0 · BLS 2.6

Where Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne falls in its industry

757 Facilities Support Services establishments

Safer than 98% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 69 Facilities Support Services employers in California.

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne (55 employees, TCR 0.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.9 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 0200400600 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne
Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne (55 employees, TCR 0.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 2.9

Sodexo at Gilead Maintenance La Verne has more employees than the Facilities Support Services median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.9. 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
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.5 0.5 1 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561210 · CA · La Verne

757 Facilities Support Services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 51 employers in La Verne, CA · 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 Bureau of Disability Determination Services 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Home Office 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR 9105 WR Headquarters Foundry Park Richmond 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Na Alii Consulting & Sales, LLC 0.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE FARMING ADMINISTRATION 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Dwelley Family Farms LLC 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-Valley Vineyard Management 55 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cornerstone Certified Vineyard 55 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of La Verne 2,233 FTE
CITY-NEAR F.E. Weymouth Filtration Plant 387 FTE
CITY-NEAR David and Margaret Home, Inc. 284 FTE
CITY-NEAR Haynes Family of Programs 280 FTE
NAT-TCR 1981 Marcus Ave 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Lake Washington Sch Dist-Caft 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Troy ATC Coatings 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR HF Burlington MA 0.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE 877 Stewart Ave Suite 7 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Pfizer Kalamazoo Janitorial 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Colorado Mesa Univ-Maverick 55 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gibbs Wire and Steel Company, LLC - Southington, CT 55 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: 2022, 2021, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.