Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · Colorado

The Bridge at Alamosa

Alamosa, CO · ~40 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.9
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

The Bridge at Alamosa runs at 235% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities workplace, earning a grade F.

The Bridge at Alamosa: 8.9 TCR = 235% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

The Bridge at Alamosa safety composite

The Bridge at Alamosa scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 9%), 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).

F

31/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 8.92 per 100 workers

Safer than 38% of industry peers

DART rate
F 13.35 per 100 workers

Safer than 9% 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

The Bridge at Alamosa: 0.0 → 26.7 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 26.7 TCR · DART/TCR 1.5× in 2023

The Bridge at Alamosa's TCR rose 26.7 from 0.0 in 2016 to 26.7 in 2023. In 2023, DART was 1.5× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Alamosa, CO ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 8.9 · 235% of ind

  • DART 13.3 DART
  • RANK #73/140
  • PHOTO Camellia at Deerwood
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~40 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Camellia at Deerwood (0.0 TCR gap)

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

The Bridge at Alamosa in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows The Bridge at Alamosa averages 8.9 TCR (235% of the Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS benchmark).

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

The Bridge at Alamosa TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=13 · 2018=0 · 2019=3.4 · 2020=3.7 · 2021=11 · 2022=13.5 · 2023=26.7 · BLS 3.8

Where The Bridge at Alamosa falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 38% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Colorado alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #73 safest of 140 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Colorado.

The Bridge at Alamosa (40 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2 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 0100200300 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate The Bridge at Alamosa
The Bridge at Alamosa (40 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

The Bridge at Alamosa has fewer employees than the Assisted-living facilities without on-si median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 7.2. 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
2023 26.7 13.3 4 0 0
2022 13.5 13.5 3 0 0
2021 11.0 0.0 2 0 0
2020 3.7 0.0 1 0 0
2019 3.4 3.4 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 13.0 6.5 4 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · CO · Alamosa

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 9,007 rated employers in Colorado with headcount on file · 29 employers in Alamosa, CO · 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 Camellia at Deerwood 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ohio Living - Cape May 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Autumn Glen Assisted Living 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Luxe Life Norman AL, LLC 8.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Grape Cultivation 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rocky Ford 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE Organic Alternatives 40 FTE
STATE-SIZE NGL WATER SOLUTIONS, LLC-GREELEY 40 FTE
CITY-NEAR San Luis Valley Health - Regional Medical Center 599 FTE
CITY-NEAR 869 324 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 869 313 FTE
CITY-NEAR 620-00422 110 FTE
NAT-TCR Food 4 Less - Mack Road 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Souto Foods LLC 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Kuert Concrete, Inc. 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Big Lots Store #4699 Alhambra, CA 8.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Milpitas Sanitation 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE Binswanger Glass Branch 122 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1993 - Salt Lake City Ut Return Center 40 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1989 - Van Buren Township Mi Return Center 40 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: 2023, 2022, 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.