Industry profile · NAICS 623311

Continuing care retirement communities

Workplace injury rates across 4,269 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

4,269
Employers
8.3
Avg TCR
3.8
BLS benchmark
81,354
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Continuing care retirement communities average 8.3 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 2.2 times the BLS national benchmark of 3.8.

8.3
avg TCR · reporting employers
3.8
BLS national benchmark
4,269
employers reporting
81,354
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Continuing care retirement communities Safety Data Reveals

The Continuing care retirement communities sector (NAICS 623311) encompasses 4,269 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 81,354 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 8.3 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 3.8 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 8.3 is higher than the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Continuing care retirement communities that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 31 of 87
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Inn at Glenellen North Lima, OH F 8.9
Maplewood Village Sauk City, WI F 8.9
The Ivy at Watertown Watertown, CT F 8.9
St. John's United - Billings Heights Wyndstone Billings, MT F 8.9
Pine Run Village Doylestown, PA F 8.9
The Watermark at East Hill Southbury, CT F 8.9
ACTS Retirement-Life Communities-The Evergreens Moorestown, NJ F 8.9
The Hearth at Windermere Fishers, IN F 8.9
Clark Retirement Community Grand Rapids, MI F 8.9
Edgewood Jamestown llc Jamestown, ND F 8.9
Concord Place Concord, NC F 8.9
The Lakes at Litchfield Pawleys Island, SC F 8.8
Sarasota Bay Club Sarasota, FL F 8.8
Hillcrest Grand Lodge, LLC Papillion, NE F 8.8
Roswell MC-716 Roswell, NM F 8.8
Belmont Village Turtle Creek Dallas, TX F 8.8
Md7022-Bvsl-Bv South River Edgewater, MD F 8.8
Brookdale Senior Living Durham, NC F 8.8
Paradise Village National City, CA F 8.8
Arden Courts of Tampa Tampa, FL F 8.8
The Woodlands of Hamilton Assisted Living Hamilton, OH F 8.8
Addington Place of Lee's Summit Lee'S Summit, MO F 8.8
The Haven at Manchester Toms River, NJ F 8.8
Rockland Place Wilmington, DE F 8.8
Brookdale University Park Senior Living Birmingham, AL F 8.8
John B Parsons Salisbury, MD F 8.8
Asbury Place Kingsport, TN F 8.8
Cottage Grove Place Cedar Rapids, IA F 8.8
Seasons Place Lewisburg, WV F 8.8
Brookdale West Melbourne II West Melbourne, FL F 8.8
Redstone Village Huntsville, AL F 8.8
LECOM Parkside at Glenwood Erie, PA F 8.8
Heartlands Assisted Living at Severna Park Severna Park, MD F 8.8
Plano Arbor Hills, LLC Plano, TX F 8.8
Franciscan Village Lemont, IL F 8.8
Bickford of Cedar Falls Cedar Falls, IA F 8.8
Mary's Woods at Marylhurst Lake Oswego, OR F 8.8
River Bend Retirement Community Cascade, IA F 8.7
Wesbury United Methodist Community Meadville, PA F 8.7
Traditions of Owatonna I Owatonna, MN F 8.7
Legacy at Georgetown Georgetown, TX F 8.7
MaineGeneral Rehab & Long Term Care - Alzheimers Care Center Gardiner, ME F 8.7
Ga-Knute-Grand Arbor Alexandria, MN F 8.7
Dominion Hixson, LLC Hixson, TN F 8.7
Dayspring Villa Denver, CO F 8.7
Centennial Park Retirement Village North Platte, NE F 8.7
The Shores Ocean City, NJ F 8.7
The Village at Luther Ridge Chambersburg, PA F 8.7
Andover Court Assisted Living Andover, KS F 8.7
Orchard Heights Clermont, FL F 8.7
← Prev Page 31 of 87 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Continuing care retirement communities?

This sector averages 8.3 against a BLS benchmark of 3.8 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.