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

The Cambridge Homes

Cambridge, MA · ~43 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.3
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

The Cambridge Homes runs at 220% 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 Cambridge Homes: 8.3 TCR = 220% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

The Cambridge Homes safety composite

The Cambridge Homes scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 42%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 8.35 per 100 workers

Safer than 42% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.58 per 100 workers

Safer than 47% 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 Cambridge Homes: 0.0 → 3.6 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 31.5 TCR · DART/TCR 0.43× in 2024

The Cambridge Homes's TCR rose 3.6 from 0.0 in 2016 to 3.6 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 31.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.43× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Cambridge, MA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 8.3 · 220% of ind

  • DART 3.6 DART
  • RANK #106/210
  • PHOTO Great Lakes Manageme…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~43 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Great Lakes Management GTHI Cottagewood Buffalo MC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

The Cambridge Homes in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows The Cambridge Homes averages 8.3 TCR (220% 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 Cambridge Homes TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=13.3 · 2018=3.2 · 2019=4 · 2020=2.5 · 2021=17.1 · 2022=31.5 · 2023=0 · 2024=3.6 · BLS 3.8

Where The Cambridge Homes falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 42% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #106 safest of 210 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in Massachusetts.

The Cambridge Homes (43 employees, TCR 8.3) 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 Cambridge Homes
The Cambridge Homes (43 employees, TCR 8.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

The Cambridge Homes 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
2024 3.6 3.6 1 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 31.5 31.5 0 11 0
2021 17.1 17.1 2 4 0
2020 2.5 2.5 1 0 0
2019 4.0 4.0 1 0 0
2018 3.2 3.2 1 0 0
2017 13.3 0.0 3 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · MA · Cambridge

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 149 employers in Cambridge, MA · 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 Great Lakes Management GTHI Cottagewood Buffalo MC 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cedar Mountain House 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Ivy at Golden Gate 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale Alexandria 8.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Joe Czajkowski Farm/Lakeside Organics of Hadley 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Guaranteed Builders and Developers Inc 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sustainable Comfort, Inc 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Acella 43 FTE
CITY-NEAR Philips NAM Field Sales & Service 5,136 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vinfen Corporation 2,662 FTE
CITY-NEAR Biogen - Cambridge 2,478 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cambridge Campus 2,473 FTE
NAT-TCR 022-OSH 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Hampton Inn and Suites - Jacksonville 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR RR79 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Jefferson Concrete Corp. 8.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Texas Metal Casting Company, Inc. 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sheridan 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Naples Executive Builders 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE TCCo-TOM 43 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: 2024, 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.