Game and inland fish agencies · Arizona

Yuma Region Four

YUMA, AZ · ~34 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.3
Avg TCR
3.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities

The verdict

Yuma Region Four runs at 228% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Game and inland fish agencies workplace, earning a grade F.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.3
avg TCR · per 100 workers
3.2
industry benchmark (BLS)
19
recordable injuries tracked

Grade compares Yuma Region Four's OSHA Total Case Rate to the BLS industry benchmark across 9 years of Form 300A filings (2016–2024). This reflects reported recordable injuries, not an independent safety inspection -- underreporting is a known limitation of employer self-recordkeeping.

Injury rate over time

Yuma Region Four's yearly Total Case Rate, against the 3.2 industry benchmark.

Total Case Rate (recordable injuries per 100 full-time workers), OSHA ITA Form 300A. Industry benchmark: BLS IIF, NAICS 924120.

-505101520 201620172018201920202021202220232024 14.23.2 Industry benchmarkYuma Region Four TCR
Total Case Rate (recordable injuries per 100 full-time workers), OSHA ITA Form 300A. Industry benchmark: BLS IIF, NAICS 924120.

Where Yuma Region Four falls in its industry

518 Game and inland fish agencies establishments

Safer than 28% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Yuma Region Four has an average TCR of 7.3, which is 228% of the industry average (3.2) for Game and inland fish agencies. This is significantly worse than average.

Safety Insights for Yuma Region Four

Yuma Region Four operates an establishment with approximately 34 full-time equivalent workers in YUMA, AZ, classified under the Game and inland fish agencies industry (NAICS 924120). Across 9 years of mandatory OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA) reporting, this employer has accumulated 19 recordable injuries, 1 occupational illnesses, and 0 workplace fatalities. The average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 7.3 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year provides the anchor metric for the F letter grade (Failing Safety Record).

Benchmarked against the Bureau of Labor Statistics industry average of 3.2 for Game and inland fish agencies, Yuma Region Four's workforce experiences 228% of the typical injury burden. This ratio matters because TCR already normalizes for hours worked, a 200,000-hour exposure base equals roughly 100 full-time workers, so establishments with very different headcounts can be compared directly. A TCR above the benchmark flags a higher-than-typical risk profile for jobseekers, insurers, and enforcement agencies to examine.

Multi-year trend analysis is the single most reliable signal here: a one-year spike could reflect a single severe event, whereas sustained elevation across 9 reporting cycles points to systemic hazard exposure. Readers evaluating Yuma Region Four as an employer, contractor, investment, or regulatory target should examine the yearly DART rate (days away, restricted, or transferred), the fatality count of 0, and any year-over-year deterioration shown in the table below. All figures come directly from employer-submitted OSHA Form 300A summaries, there is no modeling, estimation, or third-party adjustment layered on top of the government data.

Verify This Employer with OSHA

All injury, illness, and fatality figures on this page are sourced from Yuma Region Four's own mandatory OSHA Form 300A summaries. Cross-check the underlying establishment record directly against the federal source, name, NAICS classification, recordable case totals, and inspection history are all searchable on OSHA's Establishment-Specific Injury and Illness Data system.

Verify on OSHA Establishment Search

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Establishment-Specific Injury and Illness Data. NAICS 924120 - Game and inland fish agencies.

DART Rate, Transparent Calculation (2024)

DART (Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred) is computed by OSHA as incidents × 200,000 ÷ hours worked. The 200,000-hour denominator equals roughly 100 full-time workers, which lets establishments of very different sizes be compared directly.

3 DART incidents × 200,000 ÷ 56,413 hours worked = 10.64 DART

Methodology: 29 CFR 1904, OSHA Form 300A recordkeeping

Cross-Validating Context, Establishment vs Industry vs State

Benchmark TCR Source
Yuma Region Four (this establishment) 7.29 OSHA ITA Form 300A, 9-year avg
Fish and game agencies industry avg 3.20 BLS IIF, NAICS 924120
Arizona state avg (all industries) 4.73 OSHA ITA, state-level rollup

Industry benchmarks: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities (IIF) program

Reportable Incident Timeline

Year-by-year reportable incidents (recordable injuries + illnesses + fatalities) submitted by Yuma Region Four to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Each row anchors to OSHA's inspection records search where you can pull the underlying inspection case numbers and citations for that establishment-year.

Source: OSHA Inspection Information System (IMIS) - inspection case-number records

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2024 14.2 10.6 4 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 3.1 3.1 1 0 0
2021 6.6 3.3 2 0 0
2020 6.9 3.5 2 0 0
2019 10.4 10.4 3 0 0
2018 3.0 3.0 1 0 0
2017 15.4 12.3 5 0 0
2016 6.1 3.0 1 1 0

What this grade means for you

Use this grade as a relative read on Yuma Region Four's reported OSHA injury record versus its Game and inland fish agencies peers, not a verdict on whether any single site is safe today.

  • At 228% of the Game and inland fish agencies benchmark, Yuma Region Four reports more injuries than typical peers, ask specifically how the employer is reducing them. Know your rights
  • Judge this record against the wider Game and inland fish agencies sector, where injury rates vary widely, before comparing it in isolation. See the industry
  • Grades reflect 2016–2024 filings; check the latest establishment record straight from OSHA, or look up a different employer. Look up another

Safety grades reflect employers' self-reported OSHA Form 300A filings from 2016 to 2024 and can lag current conditions. A grade is not a guarantee that any specific workplace is safe or unsafe today. See our methodology and disclaimer.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Yuma Region Four's safety grade?
Yuma Region Four has a safety grade of F (Failing Safety Record). This grade is based on their average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 7.3 compared to the BLS industry benchmark of 3.2 for Game and inland fish agencies.
How is the safety grade calculated?
Safety grades are calculated by comparing an employer's average Total Case Rate (TCR) - the number of workplace injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers per year, against the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) industry benchmark. Grade A means significantly below average injury rates; grade F means significantly above average.
How many injuries has Yuma Region Four reported?
Yuma Region Four has reported 19 total injuries and 0 fatalities across 9 years of OSHA data (2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016). This data comes from mandatory OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA) reports.
Where does PlainSafetyScore get its data?
All safety data comes from OSHA's Injury Tracking Application (ITA), which collects mandatory establishment-level injury and illness reports from employers with 250+ employees or those in high-hazard industries. Industry benchmarks are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities (IIF) program.

Explore More Safety Data

→ More employers in Arizona → Industry: Game and inland fish agencies → Safety grades explained → How to check employer safety → Understanding OSHA rates
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.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Related

All employers → | Rankings →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial