Public defenders' offices · Minnesota

State of MN Board of Public Defense

Minneapolis, MN · ~750 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

State of MN Board of Public Defense runs at 18% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Public defenders' offices workplace, earning a grade A.

State of MN Board of Public Defense: 0.6 TCR = 18% of Public defenders' offices BLS 3.2 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

State of MN Board of Public Defense safety composite

State of MN Board of Public Defense scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 84% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (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).

C

57/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.58 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% of industry peers

DART rate
F 0.55 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% 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%).

State of MN Board of Public Defense held a steady TCR band

State of MN Board of Public Defense's TCR held near 0.1 from 0.6 in 2017 to 0.6 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2017 at 0.6 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.95× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=0.6 · 2018=0.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 922130 · Minneapolis, MN AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 18% of ind

  • DART 0.6 DART
  • RANK #4/8
  • PHOTO City of St. Paul Cit…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~750 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: City of St. Paul City Attorney's Office (0.0 TCR gap)

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

State of MN Board of Public Defense in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows State of MN Board of Public Defense averages 0.6 TCR (18% of the Public defenders' offices BLS benchmark).

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

State of MN Board of Public Defense TCR series: 2017=0.6 · 2018=0.6 · BLS 3.2

Where State of MN Board of Public Defense falls in its industry

92 Public defenders' offices establishments

Safer than 84% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 8 Public defenders' offices employers in Minnesota.

State of MN Board of Public Defense (750 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.2 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 05001,0001,5002,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate State of MN Board of Public Defense
State of MN Board of Public Defense (750 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.2

State of MN Board of Public Defense has more employees than the Public defenders' offices median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.2. 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
2018 0.6 0.6 3 1 0
2017 0.6 0.0 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

922130 · MN · Minneapolis

92 Public defenders' offices employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 1,321 employers in Minneapolis, MN · 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 City of St. Paul City Attorney's Office 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Guilford County - Legal Department 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Maricopa County - Legal Advocate (550) 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Maricopa County - Public Defender (520) 0.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Douglas Machine Inc. 750 FTE
STATE-SIZE U of M Masonic Children's Hosp 750 FTE
STATE-SIZE 9407 - Target.com Woodbury MN TFC 749 FTE
STATE-SIZE Imagine Print Solutions 748 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Twin Cities 22,522 FTE
CITY-NEAR MN950 MN TELECOMMUTER 12,021 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0501 - City Center 8,459 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hennepin County Medical Center 7,030 FTE
NAT-TCR GNNC, Inc. dba Gosnell Therapy and Living 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR DePuy Synthes Sales West Chester 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR GA.MACON.3 - Ricoh Usa, Inc. 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Purification Cellutions, LLC. 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE ESI Mail Pharmacy Service, Inc. St. Louis MO 750 FTE
NAT-SIZE Springfield Hospital Center 750 FTE
NAT-SIZE Manufacturing and Engineering Facility 750 FTE
NAT-SIZE JC Gutierrez Labor Service 750 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: 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.