Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities · North Carolina

The Gardens of Rose Hill

Rose Hill, NC · ~32 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.6
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

The Gardens of Rose Hill runs at 253% 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 Gardens of Rose Hill: 9.6 TCR = 253% of Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities BLS 3.8 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

The Gardens of Rose Hill safety composite

The Gardens of Rose Hill scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 84% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 33%), 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

55/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.62 per 100 workers

Safer than 33% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 84% 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

−9.2

2017→2021

The Gardens of Rose Hill injury rate improved

The Gardens of Rose Hill's TCR fell 9.2 from 9.2 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 16.1 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=9.2 · 2018=7.7 · 2019=16.1 · 2020=15.1 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623312 · Rose Hill, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 9.6 · 253% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #276/356
  • PHOTO Brookdale Johnson City
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~32 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Brookdale Johnson City (0.0 TCR gap)

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

The Gardens of Rose Hill in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows The Gardens of Rose Hill averages 9.6 TCR (253% 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 Gardens of Rose Hill TCR series: 2017=9.2 · 2018=7.7 · 2019=16.1 · 2020=15.1 · 2021=0 · BLS 3.8

Where The Gardens of Rose Hill falls in its industry

6,510 Assisted-living facilities wit establishments

Safer than 33% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 7.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #276 safest of 356 Assisted-living facilities wit employers in North Carolina.

The Gardens of Rose Hill (32 employees, TCR 9.6) 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 Gardens of Rose Hill
The Gardens of Rose Hill (32 employees, TCR 9.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 7.2

The Gardens of Rose Hill 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 15.1 15.1 1 2 0
2019 16.1 8.1 2 2 0
2018 7.7 3.8 1 1 0
2017 9.2 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623312 · NC · Rose Hill

6,510 Assisted-living facilities without on-site nursing care facilities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 14 employers in Rose Hill, NC · 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 Brookdale Johnson City 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Brookdale North Richland Hills 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Morningview at Irving Park 9.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Woodridge 9.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE T.C. Smith Produce Farm 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE LATHAMS NURSERY INC. - MONROE, NC 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lake Wendell Farming Co. LLC 32 FTE
STATE-SIZE Case Farms Goldsboro Hatchery 32 FTE
CITY-NEAR Darling Ingredients Rose Hill Division 153 FTE
CITY-NEAR ROSEMARY FEED DELIVERY -EST 66 FTE
CITY-NEAR PSSI / HOUSE OF RAEFORD INC - ROSE HILL 44 FTE
CITY-NEAR AG PROTEIN-EST 41 FTE
NAT-TCR Idpos - Spokan Peak Season Relief 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 2039-MISSISSIPPI 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 258805-Southfield Po 9.6 TCR
NAT-TCR 057/Ashland 9.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE CL Coatings, Inc - California 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE HomeServe South Jersey 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc. - Cincinnati Office 32 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pulaski Contract #2 32 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.