The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes DART rates by NAICS industry code annually — the same publication that provides TRIR benchmarks. A ‘good’ DART rate is one below your specific industry’s published average. As general context: private industry overall DART rates have typically been in the range of 1.0–1.5 in recent years, though this varies significantly by industry. Healthcare and social assistance consistently shows higher DART rates (2–4 range) due to patient handling and high physical demand; office and administrative sectors show lower rates (0.3–0.8). Construction varies by subsector, generally 1.0–2.5. Manufacturing ranges from 1.0 to 3.0+ depending on the specific manufacturing category. The most meaningful DART benchmark for any individual organization is its own trend over time — a declining DART rate year-over-year demonstrates improving safety outcomes regardless of where the rate falls relative to industry averages.

The workers’ compensation experience modification rate (EMR) calculation uses actual claim costs — both the number of claims and their dollar amounts — rather than DART rate directly. However, DART cases are the claims that generate the most significant indemnity costs (wage replacement during lost time), and reducing DART rate reduces the workers’ comp costs that flow into the EMR calculation. Fewer DART cases means fewer claims with significant indemnity exposure, which means lower total incurred losses in the EMR calculation window, which means a lower (more favorable) EMR. The correlation between DART rate and EMR is therefore strong but indirect — DART rate is the safety performance indicator that predicts future EMR, while EMR reflects the financial outcome of past DART case experience.

OSHA’s DART metric combines two distinct severity categories that it sometimes reports separately: the Days Away from Work rate (DAFW) counts only cases where the employee was absent from work for one or more days; the Job Transfer or Restriction rate (DJTR) counts only cases where the employee remained at work but on restricted duty or a different job. The full DART rate combines both. Organizations that track these separately gain additional insight: a high DAFW rate suggests that injuries are severe enough to prevent any work, indicating a need for prevention of the most serious injuries; a high DJTR rate relative to DAFW may indicate a strong modified duty program (successfully returning employees to restricted duty rather than full absence) or may indicate high-frequency injuries with work restrictions. From an EMR impact perspective, DAFW cases carry more indemnity cost than DJTR cases because wage replacement for fully absent employees accumulates at the full replacement rate while restricted-duty employees typically receive their regular wages.

Yes — in limited circumstances, a case initially classified as a DART case can be reclassified to a non-DART (medical treatment only) case if the classification was initially incorrect or if circumstances change. The most common scenario is when a physician initially restricts the employee from their regular duties but then clears them for full duty on the same day (before the incident date plus one full day has passed) — in this case, the case may not meet the DART threshold. Another scenario: if the physician’s restriction or days-away recommendation was the physician’s own conservative preference rather than the employee’s actual medical need, and the employer’s occupational medicine consultant provides a second opinion clearing the employee for modified duty, the case classification may change. Retroactive reclassification of DART cases for reasons other than initial classification error is not appropriate and can constitute a recordkeeping violation if done to improve safety statistics artificially. Always consult with your EHS counsel before reclassifying any previously recorded case.