Continuing care retirement communities · California

Vi at La Jolla Village

San Diego, CA · ~325 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
11.1
Avg TCR
3.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Vi at La Jolla Village runs at 293% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Continuing care retirement communities workplace, earning a grade F.

Vi at La Jolla Village: 11.1 TCR = 293% of Continuing care retirement communities BLS 3.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Vi at La Jolla Village safety composite

Vi at La Jolla Village scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 24%), 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

40/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 11.12 per 100 workers

Safer than 24% of industry peers

DART rate
D 3.4 per 100 workers

Safer than 50% 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%).

TCR Δ

−7.2

2017→2022

Vi at La Jolla Village injury rate improved

Vi at La Jolla Village's TCR fell 7.2 from 10.6 in 2017 to 3.4 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2021 at 16.0 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.31× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=10.6 · 2018=9.4 · 2019=15.5 · 2020=11.8 · 2021=16.0 · 2022=3.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 623311 · San Diego, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 11.1 · 293% of ind

  • DART 3.4 DART
  • RANK #129/216
  • PHOTO Solaris Senior Livin…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 148 inj
  • SIZE ~325 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Solaris Senior Living Merritt Island, LLC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Vi at La Jolla Village in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Vi at La Jolla Village averages 11.1 TCR (293% 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

Vi at La Jolla Village TCR series: 2017=10.6 · 2018=9.4 · 2019=15.5 · 2020=11.8 · 2021=16 · 2022=3.4 · BLS 3.8

Where Vi at La Jolla Village falls in its industry

4,127 Continuing care retirement com establishments

Safer than 24% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #129 safest of 216 Continuing care retirement com employers in California.

Vi at La Jolla Village (325 employees, TCR 11.1) 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 0100200300400 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Vi at La Jolla Village
Vi at La Jolla Village (325 employees, TCR 11.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 6.9

Vi at La Jolla Village 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
2022 3.4 3.4 15 0 0
2021 16.0 14.3 26 12 0
2020 11.8 10.1 18 11 0
2019 15.5 14.7 39 1 0
2018 9.4 7.1 24 0 0
2017 10.6 10.6 26 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

623311 · CA · San Diego

4,127 Continuing care retirement communities employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 1,979 employers in San Diego, CA · 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 Solaris Senior Living Merritt Island, LLC 11.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Village at Utz Terrace 11.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Rowntree Gardens 11.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Luther Park at Sandpoint 11.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Prima Wawona - Plant 3 325 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sequoia Farm Labor Inc 325 FTE
STATE-SIZE COACHELLA OFFICE 325 FTE
STATE-SIZE Otis Elevator Company-Greater LA 325 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC San Diego Health 9,310 FTE
CITY-NEAR General Atomics 8,108 FTE
CITY-NEAR Health Human Services Agency 6,080 FTE
CITY-NEAR National University 4,955 FTE
NAT-TCR Minneapolis ARC 11.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Lincoln Place 11.1 TCR
NAT-TCR 5472-NAI-0034-0034-02876 11.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Hope Feed Mill 11.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Ganir & Company Pacific Rim Commercial Services, Inc. 325 FTE
NAT-SIZE Asplundh Tree Expert, LLC - 057 325 FTE
NAT-SIZE Wegmans Erie Ridge Road 069 325 FTE
NAT-SIZE 0737 - Centennial Nv Whse 325 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: 2022, 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.