Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufacturing · Indiana

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort

Greenfield, IN · ~48 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort runs at 175% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort: 5.8 TCR = 175% of Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort safety composite

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 31%), 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).

D

37/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.31 per 100 workers

Safer than 34% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort: 6.8 → 8.3 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 8.3 TCR · DART/TCR 0.57× in 2021

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort's TCR rose 1.5 from 6.8 in 2016 to 8.3 in 2021. In 2021, DART was 0.57× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332321 · Greenfield, IN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 5.8 · 175% of ind

  • DART 3.3 DART
  • RANK #23/30
  • PHOTO Southern Stretch For…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 17 inj
  • SIZE ~48 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Southern Stretch Forming (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort averages 5.8 TCR (175% of the Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort TCR series: 2016=6.8 · 2017=7.9 · 2018=3.9 · 2019=2.4 · 2020=5.3 · 2021=8.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort falls in its industry

515 Door and jamb assemblies, meta establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Indiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #23 safest of 30 Door and jamb assemblies, meta employers in Indiana.

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort (48 employees, TCR 5.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 83 employees and a TCR of 4.1 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 Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort
Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort (48 employees, TCR 5.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 83 employees and a TCR of 4.1

Stanley Access Technologies Mount Comfort has fewer employees than the Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufac median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.1. 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 8.3 3.3 5 0 0
2020 5.3 3.5 3 0 0
2019 2.4 2.4 2 0 0
2018 3.9 0.0 2 0 0
2017 7.9 0.0 3 0 0
2016 6.8 6.8 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332321 · IN · Greenfield

515 Door and jamb assemblies, metal, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,750 rated employers in Indiana with headcount on file · 126 employers in Greenfield, 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 Southern Stretch Forming 5.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Arning Companies, Inc. 5.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Peerless Commercial Applications Group (CAG) 5.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR TODCO 5.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Police Department 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pure Green Farms 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pioneer Hi-Bred International Rushville 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Harrison County REMC 48 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - MQJ1 2,520 FTE
CITY-NEAR Executive Management Services, Inc 2,096 FTE
CITY-NEAR Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield 1,693 FTE
CITY-NEAR Elanco Headquarters 1,453 FTE
NAT-TCR Arning Companies, Inc. 5.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Searsport 5.8 TCR
NAT-TCR J.D. Labor Contractor 5.8 TCR
NAT-TCR ProHealth Home Care and Angle's Grace Hospice 5.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE NBC Phoenix 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE Avantara Salem 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE West Main 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gold Coast Auto Group Inc 48 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.