Continuing care retirement communities · Missouri

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance

Eureka, MO · ~99 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.1
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance runs at 159% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Continuing care retirement communities workplace, earning a grade D.

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance: 6.1 TCR = 159% of Continuing care retirement communities BLS 3.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance safety composite

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 70% 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

60/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 6.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 58% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.09 per 100 workers

Safer than 70% 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

−11.7

2016→2019

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance injury rate improved

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance's TCR fell 11.7 from 13.9 in 2016 to 2.2 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2016 at 13.9 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.18× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=13.9 · 2017=6.0 · 2018=2.2 · 2019=2.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Eureka, MO ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 6.1 · 159% of ind

  • DART 1.1 DART
  • RANK #53/85
  • PHOTO The Piedmont at Buck…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 22 inj
  • SIZE ~99 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: The Piedmont at Buckhead (0.0 TCR gap)

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

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance averages 6.1 TCR (159% 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

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance TCR series: 2016=13.9 · 2017=6 · 2018=2.2 · 2019=2.2 · BLS 3.8

Where St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance falls in its industry

4,127 Continuing care retirement com establishments

Safer than 58% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Missouri alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #53 safest of 85 Continuing care retirement com employers in Missouri.

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance (99 employees, TCR 6.1) 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance
St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance (99 employees, TCR 6.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

St. Andrews Assisted Living at Francis Plance 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
2019 2.2 1.1 2 0 0
2018 2.2 2.2 2 0 0
2017 6.0 1.2 5 0 0
2016 13.9 8.6 13 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · MO · Eureka

4,127 Continuing care retirement communities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,075 rated employers in Missouri with headcount on file · 12 employers in Eureka, MO · 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 The Piedmont at Buckhead 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Devonshire Chatsworth 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kendal-Crosslands Communities 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Garden Villas South 6.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Hawthorn Generating Station 99 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sensory Effects/ Balchem 99 FTE
STATE-SIZE Stolze Printing Company, Inc. 99 FTE
STATE-SIZE S&B Pharma, Inc. dba Alkem Laboratories 99 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cenveo St. Louis 333 FTE
CITY-NEAR Six Flags St Louis 313 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 295 297 FTE
CITY-NEAR 295 284 FTE
NAT-TCR Sales - Indio 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR 7979 Cook Road 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR 20 West Gude Drive 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR JACKSONVILLE 5934 Richard Street 6.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Schmolz + Bickenbach Carol Stream, IL 99 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bagcraft - Fort Madison 99 FTE
NAT-SIZE Reasors8 99 FTE
NAT-SIZE Golden Gates Casino 99 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: 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.