Continuing care retirement communities · Montana

The Springs at Whitefish

Whitefish, MT · ~68 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
11.8
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

The Springs at Whitefish runs at 312% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Continuing care retirement communities workplace, earning a grade F.

The Springs at Whitefish: 11.8 TCR = 312% of Continuing care retirement communities BLS 3.8 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

The Springs at Whitefish safety composite

The Springs at Whitefish scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 64% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 22%), 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 11.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.99 per 100 workers

Safer than 64% 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%).

Rising injury rate

The Springs at Whitefish: 7.8 → 13.9 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 16.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.17× in 2024

The Springs at Whitefish's TCR rose 6.1 from 7.8 in 2016 to 13.9 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 16.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.17× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · Whitefish, MT ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 11.8 · 312% of ind

  • DART 2.0 DART
  • RANK #11/27
  • PHOTO Bickford of Bexley
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 50 inj
  • SIZE ~68 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bickford of Bexley (0.0 TCR gap)

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

The Springs at Whitefish in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows The Springs at Whitefish averages 11.8 TCR (312% of the Continuing care retirement communities BLS benchmark).

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

The Springs at Whitefish TCR series: 2016=7.8 · 2017=9.7 · 2018=16 · 2019=12.1 · 2020=14.5 · 2021=12.1 · 2022=4.9 · 2023=15.4 · 2024=13.9 · BLS 3.8

Where The Springs at Whitefish falls in its industry

4,127 Continuing care retirement com establishments

Safer than 22% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Montana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #11 safest of 27 Continuing care retirement com employers in Montana.

The Springs at Whitefish (68 employees, TCR 11.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9 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 050100150200250 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate The Springs at Whitefish
The Springs at Whitefish (68 employees, TCR 11.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

The Springs at Whitefish has more employees than the Continuing care retirement communities median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.9. 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 13.9 2.0 7 0 0
2023 15.4 4.4 7 0 0
2022 4.9 2.5 2 0 0
2021 12.1 9.1 4 0 0
2020 14.5 8.3 7 0 0
2019 12.1 6.1 6 0 0
2018 16.0 16.0 8 0 0
2017 9.7 5.8 5 0 0
2016 7.8 7.8 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · MT · Whitefish

4,127 Continuing care retirement communities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 1,536 rated employers in Montana with headcount on file · 24 employers in Whitefish, MT · 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 Bickford of Bexley 11.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Jefferson City Retirement LLC dba Primrose of Jefferson City 11.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Smith Ranch Homes Homeowners' Association 11.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR JFH Management 11.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE JNL Brown Trucking Corp 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE Heritage Place 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE Malmstrom Airforce Base 68 FTE
STATE-SIZE Elkhorn Construction, MONDAK Service Area 69 FTE
CITY-NEAR Logan Health Whitefish 500 FTE
CITY-NEAR North Valley Hospital 460 FTE
CITY-NEAR Winter Sports Inc 313 FTE
CITY-NEAR SWY-0030-0031-02106 FAC-02106-WHITEFISH-MT 119 FTE
NAT-TCR D7 Mattoon Yard 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR TXH043 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Eastland Forrester Corporation 11.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Kre-Bsl Husky Faxon Woods Operation LLC 11.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE The Springs at Anna Maria 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE Vance Metal Fabricators 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE Aegis of Marymoor 68 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Fresh Market 128 68 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.