Building cleaning services, janitorial · Minnesota

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC

Minneapolis, MN · ~46 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
8.9
Avg TCR
4.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC runs at 198% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Building cleaning services, janitorial workplace, earning a grade D.

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC: 8.9 TCR = 198% of Building cleaning services, janitorial BLS 4.5 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC safety composite

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 78% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 10%), 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

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 8.91 per 100 workers

Safer than 10% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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%).

TCR Δ

−9.6

2022→2024

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC injury rate improved

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC's TCR fell 9.6 from 9.6 in 2022 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 17.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=9.6 · 2023=17.2 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 561720 · Minneapolis, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 8.9 · 198% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #37/41
  • PHOTO Fort Lauderdale Inte…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~46 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Fort Lauderdale International Airport - AVN (0.0 TCR gap)

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

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC averages 8.9 TCR (198% of the Building cleaning services, janitorial BLS benchmark).

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

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC TCR series: 2022=9.6 · 2023=17.2 · 2024=0 · BLS 4.5

Where The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC falls in its industry

4,064 Building cleaning services, ja establishments

Safer than 10% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #37 safest of 41 Building cleaning services, ja employers in Minnesota.

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC (46 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2 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 02004006008001,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC
The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC (46 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 3.2

The Common Good Cleaning Company, LLC has fewer employees than the Building cleaning services, janitorial median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.2. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 17.2 4.3 3 1 0
2022 9.6 0.0 1 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

561720 · MN · Minneapolis

4,064 Building cleaning services, janitorial 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 Fort Lauderdale International Airport - AVN 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR ERMC - Carolina Place 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR HES H Ed at SLU Medical 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR JAN-CA-SoCal 8.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Canby 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE Elk River Municipal Utilities 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rogers 46 FTE
STATE-SIZE District Energy Saint Paul 46 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 RSCG - Phoenix Warehouse 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Henry Ford Kingswood Hospital 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Birchaven 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR 2twenty Logistics LLC 8.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE 717 Logistics LLC 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE KDLA State Library 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE Parish Tractor Company, LLC 46 FTE
NAT-SIZE PSL-Town Village Crossing 46 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.