Workers' compensation program administration · North Carolina

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations

Chapel Hill, NC · ~210 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.9
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations runs at 122% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Workers' compensation program administration workplace, earning a grade D.

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations: 3.9 TCR = 122% of Workers' compensation program administration BLS 3.2 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations safety composite

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 21%), 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)
F 3.91 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.38 per 100 workers

Safer than 29% 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

−4.7

2016→2018

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations injury rate improved

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations's TCR fell 4.7 from 6.5 in 2016 to 1.9 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2016 at 6.5 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.35× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=6.5 · 2017=3.3 · 2018=1.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 923130 · Chapel Hill, NC ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 3.9 · 122% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #10/10
  • PHOTO SSA Anaheim Regional…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 23 inj
  • SIZE ~210 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SSA Anaheim Regional Center (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations averages 3.9 TCR (122% of the Workers' compensation program administration BLS benchmark).

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

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations TCR series: 2016=6.5 · 2017=3.3 · 2018=1.9 · BLS 3.2

Where Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations falls in its industry

169 Workers' compensation program establishments

Safer than 21% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 10 Workers' compensation program employers in North Carolina.

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations (210 employees, TCR 3.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 159 employees and a TCR of 1.7 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 05001,0001,5002,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations
Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations (210 employees, TCR 3.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 159 employees and a TCR of 1.7

Town of Chapel Hill - Transit Operations has more employees than the Workers' compensation program administra median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.7. 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
2018 1.9 1.4 8 0 0
2017 3.3 3.3 3 3 0
2016 6.5 5.5 12 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

923130 · NC · Chapel Hill

169 Workers' compensation program administration employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 104 employers in Chapel 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 SSA Anaheim Regional Center 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR SSA Training and Career Development 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Floyd County-DCBS 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aging and Adult Services 3.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Donley's Concrete Group LLC 210 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wachs Services Belmont 210 FTE
STATE-SIZE Electrical Workforce Solutions, LLC 210 FTE
STATE-SIZE Clariant Corporation Monroe Road Regional Headquarters 210 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 21,973 FTE
CITY-NEAR UNC Health Care 11,237 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spec Personnel, LLC 644 FTE
CITY-NEAR Brookdale chapel hill 509 FTE
NAT-TCR 03-Brown Deer 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Thief River Falls (Mnthe) 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Giant Eagle #3284 3.9 TCR
NAT-TCR US NM Carlsbad 3300 East Greene 3.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Harvest Pipeline Company 210 FTE
NAT-SIZE Alert Ambulance Service 210 FTE
NAT-SIZE Marietta 210 FTE
NAT-SIZE RGH Enterprises - Ontario, CA 210 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: 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.