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 63 of 87
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Brook Ridge Pharr, TX C 4.3
Brookdale Westlake Village Westlake, OH C 4.3
ACTS Retirement-Life Communities-Gwynedd Estates Ambler, PA C 4.3
Louisa Place Ferndale, WA C 4.3
Avamere at Albany Albany, OR C 4.3
ER Opco ML, LLC dba Meadow Lake Senior Living Tyler, TX C 4.3
Presbyterian Manor Arkansas City, KS C 4.3
Willow Grove Matthews, NC C 4.3
Fairhaven, Inc. Fort Washington, PA C 4.3
Riverlanding Colfax, NC C 4.3
The Gardens of St Francis Oregon, OH C 4.3
Terrebonne Place Houma, LA C 4.3
Wissota Place Chippewa Falls, WI C 4.3
Creekside on Bardstown Louisville, KY C 4.3
Manor Park, Inc. Midland, TX C 4.3
Copper Place Yuma, AZ C 4.3
ISLF - Westchester - Winter Park, LLC Winter Park, FL C 4.3
The Forum at Deer Creek Deerfield Beach, FL C 4.3
Bloom at Eagle Creek Indianapolis, IN C 4.3
Potomac Place Woodbridge, VA C 4.2
Wesley Ridge Reynoldsburg, OH C 4.2
Edencrest at Riverwoods Des Moines, IA C 4.2
Sun Terrace Prosser Bellevue, WA C 4.2
The Fountains of Hope Assisted Living & Memory Care Community Sarasota, FL C 4.2
Renaissance Marquis Cleveland, TN C 4.2
Dominion Wellspring Johnson City, LLC Johnson City, TN C 4.2
Burcham Hills Lansing, MI C 4.2
Generations at Agritopia Gilbert, AZ C 4.2
Timberwood Assisted Living Oklahoma City, OK C 4.2
Brandywine Living at Pennington Pennington, NJ C 4.2
Legend at Rivendell Oklahoma City, OK C 4.2
Arden Courts of Seminole Seminole, FL C 4.2
St James Place of Baton Rouge Baton Rouge, LA C 4.2
0414-Harmony Trace Hilliard, OH C 4.2
Dominion Senior Living of Athens Athens, TN C 4.2
Cogir of North Bay Vallejo, CA C 4.2
Arden Courts of Austin Austin, TX C 4.2
Hearth at Franklin Franklin, TN C 4.2
Nottingham EL Jamesville, NY C 4.2
LTHCC Altoona, FL C 4.2
Kendal at Oberlin Oberlin, OH C 4.2
ACTS Retirement Life Communities - Bayleigh Chase Easton, MD C 4.2
ACTS Retirement-Life Communities-Lanier Village Estates Gainesville, GA C 4.2
The Courtyard at Colfax Colfax, WA C 4.2
Forest Hill Heights LLC Forest Hill, MD C 4.2
Chesapeake Bickford Chesapeake, VA C 4.2
Millers Oak Pointe ALF Columbia City, IN C 4.2
Viamonte Walnut Creek, CA C 4.1
Prospect Center Queensbury, NY C 4.1
Ashland Assisted Living Ashland, OH C 4.1
← Prev Page 63 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.