For years, Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) has been a primary measure of safety performance. Many organizations proudly point to a low TRIR as proof of a strong culture and safe operations. And while declining injury rates are worth celebrating, they tell only part of the story. Across the industry, one troubling trend remains unchanged for the last fifteen-plus years: fatality rates in construction have not meaningfully declined, even as TRIR continues to decrease.

This disconnect forces us to confront a hard truth: a low recordable rate doesn’t guarantee that high-energy hazards with the potential to result in a Serious Injury and Fatality (SIF) are consistently identified and controlled. In fact, relying solely on traditional lagging metrics can obscure significant risks and leave organizations with a false sense of security.

This guide is designed to be one of the clearest and most comprehensive resources available on the topic. It brings together the latest thinking from safety researchers, owners, and contractors to explain why conventional approaches fall short and what it takes to build a modern, safety system. You’ll find practical definitions, evaluation methods, precursor examples, case studies, leading and lagging indicators, and a full implementation playbook.

Whether you’re new to SIF prevention or looking to strengthen an existing program, this guide provides a comprehensive framework for identifying, managing, and reducing the exposures most likely to cause catastrophic harm.

What Is Recordable Rate?

A “recordable” is defined by OSHA as a work-related injury or illness that results in death, days away from work, restricted duty or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, loss of consciousness, or a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician.

The Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) reflects the number of recordables per 100 full-time workers per year. It is calculated as:

TRIR = (Recordable Cases × 200,000) ÷ Hours Worked

While this metric is useful for benchmarking injury frequency, it does not distinguish between minor medical cases and life-altering events.

The Risk of Focusing on Recordable Rate

TRIR is NOT a flawed metric.

The flaws that have developed over time are in the ways that organizations are using TRIR.

Some of the most common misuses of TRIR are described here.

1. As already mentioned, and perhaps the most dangerous misuse is accepting a low TRIR as evidence of strong safety performance and a strong safety culture.
2. Overreacting to a spike in TRIR on a project or over a short period of time. Grandstanding. Demanding an explanation. Requiring a recovery plan. All of this without gaining important context around the nature of the injuries, the response to the injuries, and the safety culture that is developing.
3. Establishing a TRIR threshold and eliminating contractors from consideration during traditional prequalification processes. An elevated TRIR does not necessarily mean that a contractor does not have an established safety culture and will be a poor performer on a client’s project. Similarly, a low TRIR does not guarantee performance. In both cases, additional context is important.
1. An elevated TRIR should be used to facilitate conversations, gain a clearer understanding of the incidents that have occurred, and to learn how companies have responded to previous incidents to improve performance.
2. A contractor with a low TRIR should be onboarded through typical processes, and performance should be monitored to validate that the low TRIR is reflective of a strong safety culture and the contractor’s ability to execute high-risk work safely.

Consider the following questions:

• Can a project with a high recordable rate be a ‘safe’ project with a strong safety culture?
• Can a project with a low recordable rate be an ‘at-risk’ project with significant exposures?

The answer to both of these questions is “yes”, yet many organizations equate a low recordable rate with operating safely. This is so widely believed, in many ways because of the sharp focus on TRIR over the last 30 years, that EHS professionals are often met with confusion if they suggest otherwise.

There is value in tracking and benchmarking against recordable rates. But, after evaluating their recordable rate, most organizations only look at the industry average and the percentage of yearly improvement. Too often, organizations assume that because something didn’t happen in the past, it won’t happen in the future. But recordables only explain part of the story.

To better understand the overall safety performance of an individual project or organization, we need to evangelize a more comprehensive approach to understanding risk. Organizations should prioritize SIF prevention, incorporate discussions about high-energy hazards into daily activities, and learn from all events with the potential to result in a SIF.

What is a SIF-potential event?

The definition of a SIF-actual event is pretty clear and generally understood. A Serious Injury or Fatality is an incident that is:

• Life Ending - results in a fatality
• Life-Threatening - requires immediate life-saving medical attention to prevent a fatality
• Life-Altering - results in permanent disability or loss of body function

An event has SIF-potential when:

• A high-energy hazard is present

• Management controls are absent, ineffective, or not complied with
• A serious injury or fatality is the most likely outcome if allowed to continue

Examples of events with SIF-potential include:

• A dropped load that lands inches from a worker
• A worker at a leading edge is exposed to a 12-foot fall
• Work being performed in an 8-foot deep, unprotected trench

These exposures may not produce harm, but the underlying risk and the presence of an uncontrolled high-energy hazard are consistent with events that have resulted in serious injuries or fatalities. Tracking SIF-potential events can provide organizations with visibility into dangerous conditions long before they lead to tragedy.

Shift to SIF Exposures

While the term SIF has become somewhat familiar in the construction industry, it hasn’t yet transformed into a metric that is systematically tracked as a key performance indicator (KPI). OSHA requires that actual SIFs be tracked and recorded, and organizations already recognize the importance of conducting thorough investigations into these cases. But what most teams fail to track and evaluate are the recordable incidents, near misses, and other exposures that had SIF-potential. These incidents do not typically receive anywhere near the same level of attention as an actual SIF. However, these exposures deserve a rigorous investigation to take advantage of a valuable learning opportunity.

This is why improving data collection and reporting is the first step to understanding and quantifying a company’s Total SIF Exposure.

How to Evaluate Total SIF Exposure

Consider the following when evaluating total SIF exposure.

1. Incidents that resulted in a SIF
2. First aid cases and recordable incidents with SIF-potential
3. Near misses with SIF-potential
4. Observations of exposures with SIF-potential

Situations can be deemed to have SIF-potential if they contain SIF Precursors. According to the ASSP, a SIF Precursor can be defined as an unmitigated high-risk situation that will result in a serious or fatal injury if allowed to continue.

A proper evaluation of total SIF exposure answers three questions:

1. Was there a high-risk exposure?
1. Example: An employee was exposed to a 15-foot fall.
2. Was there a failure to follow established procedures and implement controls?
1. Example: A written fall protection program was in place, but there was a failure to execute. Controls were absent.
3. Was the activity allowed to continue?
1. Example: The exposure continued until a project team member intervened.

Answering these three questions allows you to determine if an incident or exposure had SIF potential or not.

Here’s an example of each type of exposure.

• Incident that resulted in a SIF - A worker becomes trapped when the unsupported walls of a 7-foot deep trench collapse. Rescue crews arrive and extract the worker, but the worker does not survive.
• Recordable incident with SIF-potential - An employee is struck in the forearm by material that fell from above. The employee’s forearm is fractured, but the employee will recover fully. It is found that the material that fell from above was not stacked securely.
• Near miss with SIF-potential - The walls of a 7-foot deep trench, where employees were working, but had recently exited, collapsed. Further investigation revealed the walls were not supported properly.
• Observation of an exposure with SIF-potential - Two workers are observed working in a 7-foot deep trench where the trench walls are not supported or sloped to prevent possible cave-ins. The workers are removed from the trench, the hazard is addressed, and proper controls are put in place before work continues.

Common SIF Precursor Scenarios in Construction

Every serious incident is preceded by warning signs. In SIF language, those warning signs are called precursors: high-risk situations that are likely to result in a serious injury or fatality if work continues without proper controls.

In construction, many precursors are well known:

• Work at Heights Without Protection - Crews working on roofs, scaffolds, or open edges without guardrails, nets, or personal fall arrest systems. A single misstep can result in a fatal fall.
• Unprotected Trenches and Excavations - Excavations deeper than 5 feet with no shoring, shielding, or proper sloping. A cave-in can bury workers in seconds.
• Heavy Equipment and Vehicle Exposure - Workers on foot in close proximity to moving equipment, backing vehicles, or suspended loads. The struck-by or caught-between potential is high.
• Electrical Work on Live Systems - Tasks performed on or near energized conductors without lockout/tagout, proper isolation, or adequate approach distances. The consequence can be electrocution or severe burns.
• Confined Space Entry Without Controls - Entry into tanks, vaults, pits, or sewers without testing the atmosphere, ventilation, or rescue planning. Hazardous atmospheres can quickly become fatal.
• Unguarded or Defeated Safeguards - Machinery operating with missing guards, bypassed interlocks, or disabled safety devices. A momentary lapse can result in amputations or crush injuries.

These scenarios align closely with the leading causes of construction fatalities. The key is not simply recognizing them in theory, but systematically tracking and acting on them in the field. When a supervisor notes an unprotected edge, an unshored trench, or a worker in a vehicle blind spot, that observation should be treated as an exposure with SIF potential. Addressing the exposure in the field and moving on is no longer enough. Blaming the worker and removing the worker from the site as a default will not drive meaningful change or uncover the underlying system failures.

By treating these common precursors as serious events in their own right, project and safety teams can intervene before anyone is hurt and steadily drive down total SIF exposure.

Case Studies in SIF Tracking

Real-world experience shows that tracking SIF exposures can drive meaningful improvement. In recent years, several analyses have noted a modest decline in serious injury and fatality cases, even as industry-wide fatality rates remain largely flat. That shift is not happening by accident. Organizations that deliberately focus on high-consequence hazards, SIF precursors, and culture change are starting to see results.

General Contractors and Owners

Several large owners and general contractors have piloted SIF-focused programs and reported rapid early gains. Research and field reports from organizations such as the Construction Industry Institute (CII), CPWR, and NIOSH consistently show that increasing visibility to high-energy hazards, using SIF precursors, and intervening earlier in the work process leads to measurable reductions in serious risk exposure, even before changes appear in traditional lagging indicators.

Collaborative Efforts

Industry collaboration is another powerful lever. Highwire’s SIF Working Group, for example, brings together safety leaders from owners and contractors to share data and lessons learned. Across one group of participants, they found that only a small portion of recordable injuries had SIF-potential, but many more SIF-potential exposures were identified through observations and inspections. In other words, the biggest learning opportunity was not in the injuries themselves, but in the high-risk conditions that had not yet produced harm.

Some contractors have responded by creating a simple “clearing house” process. When someone in the field reports a SIF-potential condition, a safety professional reviews and validates the classification, then uses that case as an opportunity for coaching. Over time, this improves the consistency of SIF data and teaches employees what a true high-potential exposure looks like.

The common thread in all these efforts is deliberate attention. When organizations shine a light on SIF exposures rather than only celebrating low recordable rates or overreacting to elevated recordable rates, they tend to see fewer life-threatening events and stronger overall safety performance.

Serious Injury and Fatality Prevention

SIF prevention goes beyond lowering injury counts. It requires a systematic effort to identify, control, and learn from the high-energy hazards that can cause life-changing harm.

Organizations that excel at SIF prevention consistently do five things well:

1. They focus on exposures, not just outcomes. Instead of only asking, “How many injuries did we have?” they ask, “Where are our serious hazards today, and are we controlling them?”
2. They identify and act on SIF precursors. Unprotected edges, unshored excavations, energized work without lockout/tagout, and equipment blind-spots are treated as serious events, even before an injury occurs.
3. They investigate SIF-potential events rigorously. A near miss with SIF-potential receives the same level of curiosity and corrective action as an actual SIF because it reveals a breakdown in controls.
4. They strengthen critical safeguards. Engineered controls, planning processes, verification steps, and supervision around high-hazard work are emphasized and resourced appropriately.
5. They build a learning culture. Workers feel safe speaking up, leaders reinforce the importance of serious hazard control, and the organization continuously improves based on SIF data, not luck.

At its core, SIF prevention is about shifting attention to the hazards that matter most. When teams treat SIF exposures with the seriousness they deserve, regardless of whether an injury occurred, the likelihood of a life-altering event drops dramatically.

Implementation Playbook: Launching a SIF Tracking Program

For many companies, the idea of tracking SIF exposures feels new. The good news is that you don’t need to start from scratch. Most organizations can establish a SIF program by enhancing existing processes.

Below is a practical playbook to get started.

1. Secure Leadership Commitment

SIF prevention starts at the top. Leaders need to understand that a low recordable rate does not guarantee freedom from serious incidents. Once that gap is clear, most executives quickly agree that preventing life-altering injuries must be a priority.

Leadership should:

• Clearly articulate that “one serious injury is one too many.”
• Support tracking SIF-potential events as a core safety strategy, not a side project.
• Allocate time and resources for training, investigations, and corrective actions.
• Regularly review SIF-potential events, not just recordable rates.

When leaders consistently ask, “What are our most serious exposures right now?” it sends a powerful signal throughout the organization.

2. Establish Clear Definitions and Criteria

Consistency is essential. Everyone should share the same understanding of:

• What qualifies as a SIF.
• What qualifies as SIF-potential (SIF-P).
• What situations count as SIF precursors.

Many organizations use a simple three-question screen:

1. Was there a high-risk/high-energy exposure?
2. Were critical controls missing, ineffective, or not followed?
3. Was the activity allowed to continue (even briefly) in that condition?

If the answer to all three is “yes,” the situation is classified as SIF-potential. Document these criteria and provide examples from your own work to help people apply them correctly.

3. Integrate SIF Reporting into Existing Processes

Rather than building a new reporting system, it’s often easier to add SIF questions to the processes you already use:

• Incident reports
• Near-miss reports
• Safety observations and inspection forms
• Pre-task plans (PTPs) and job hazard analyses (JHAs)

For example, add a simple field such as: “Did this incident or observation have SIF potential?” Train supervisors to think in those terms when they complete paperwork. The goal is for SIF classification to become a routine part of how events are documented.

4. Assign Roles and Responsibilities

Decide who will own the SIF program and how decisions will be made. Common elements include:

• A central safety leader responsible for program oversight.
• A cross-functional SIF team (safety, operations, project leaders).
• SIF “champions” or points of contact at the project level.

This group should review SIF-potential events, lead investigations, and track corrective actions. Having named owners prevents SIF tracking from becoming “everyone’s job and no one’s job.”

5. Train and Communicate

Field teams can’t support SIF prevention if they don’t understand the concepts. Incorporate SIF awareness into:

• Supervisor and foreman training.
• New hire orientations.
• Toolbox talks and safety meetings.

Focus on real examples: “Here’s a recent situation that had SIF potential–what made it high risk, and what should have happened instead?” Encourage crews to ask, “What’s the worst that could happen on this task?” as part of daily planning.

6. Use Tools to Capture and Analyze Data

Whether you use a dedicated safety platform, a mobile app, or a simple spreadsheet, the important thing is to capture SIF-related data in a consistent way. At a minimum, track:

• Date and location.
• Description of the exposure.
• SIF-P classification and risk category (fall, trench, electrical, etc.).
• Corrective actions and closure dates.

Periodic reviews of this data will reveal trends: types of work with frequent SIF precursors, projects with recurring patterns, or controls that commonly fail.

7. Investigate and Learn from SIF-potential Events

Treat SIF-potential events with the same seriousness as an actual serious injury. That means:

• Conducting root cause analyses.
• Involving operations leaders in the review.
• Sharing key learnings across projects.

A near miss with SIF-potential is a “free lesson.” The more you learn from these events, the fewer actual serious injuries you will see.

8. Measure Progress and Adjust

Over time, track a small set of SIF-related metrics (see next section). Use them to:

• Identify where leading indicators (controls, inspections, training) need to improve.
• Confirm whether changes are working.
• Keep leadership informed and engaged.

As you learn more, refine your definitions, processes, and training. The goal is not perfection on day one, but steady improvement in how your organization identifies and controls serious hazards.

Key Performance Indicators for SIF Tracking

Traditional metrics like Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) are useful, but they don’t tell the full story about serious risk. To understand and manage SIF exposure, organizations need a targeted set of KPIs that highlight both activity and outcomes.

Leading Indicators (Proactive Measures)

Leading indicators focus on what you are doing to prevent serious harm. Examples include:

• Critical Safeguards in Place
• Percentage of high-risk work (e.g., work at height, trenching, confined space) where required critical controls were verified before work began.

• Timely Correction of SIF Precursors
• Percentage of identified SIF-related hazards corrected within a set timeframe (e.g., 24 or 48 hours).
• SIF-p Reports and Investigations
• Number of SIF-potential near misses and observations reported each month, and the percentage that receive a formal review or investigation.
• Leadership Engagement
• Number of site visits, audits, or safety walks where leaders specifically review serious hazards and SIF controls.

• Training Completion for High-Risk Work
• Percentage of workers trained in fall protection, excavation safety, lockout/tagout, and other SIF-related topics.

• Stop Work Authority
• Number of times that a worker, work crew, or supervisor stopped or paused work to reassess when a high-energy hazard was encountered that was not anticipated. Indicates that your stop work authority policy does not just exist on paper but is supported in practice, especially when it comes to addressing hazards with the potential to result in a SIF.

These indicators help answer, “Are we consistently putting solid defenses in place where the stakes are highest?”

Lagging Indicators (Outcome Measures)

Lagging indicators track what has already happened. For SIFs, they typically include:

• Number of SIF Incidents
• Count of actual serious injuries and fatalities in a given period.
• Serious Incident Frequency (Including Potential)
• A combined rate that includes both actual SIFs and SIF-potential near misses.
• Severity Mix
• The proportion of serious injuries out of all recordable injuries.

Because serious events are (thankfully) relatively rare, short-term improvements can be misleading. That’s why lagging indicators should always be interpreted alongside leading indicators. For example, if SIF occurrences are flat but reporting of SIF precursors is rising, and controls are improving, you may be building a stronger system even before the lagging data shows it.

The ultimate goal is simple: reduce both the number of serious events and the total number of high-risk exposures over time.

Glossary of Key SIF Terms

To close, here is a brief glossary of key terms used in SIF discussions:

• Serious Injury and Fatality (SIF) - An event that results in a fatality, life-threatening injury, or life-altering injury (such as permanent disability or loss of function).
• SIF-Potential (SIF-P) - An incident, near miss, or hazardous condition that could reasonably have resulted in a serious injury or fatality if circumstances had been slightly different.
• SIF Precursor - An unmitigated high-risk condition where critical controls are missing or ineffective, and which is likely to result in a SIF if work continues.
• Total SIF Exposure - The total number of events and conditions with SIF potential across an organization, including actual SIFs, SIF-related recordables, SIF near misses, and SIF precursors identified through observations and inspections.
• Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) - A traditional metric representing the number of OSHA recordable injuries per 200,000 work hours. Useful, but not a direct measure of serious risk.
• Leading Indicator - A proactive measure of safety performance that reflects conditions, behaviors, or processes that reduce the likelihood of incidents (for example, completion of high-risk work permits or closure of SIF precursors).
• Lagging Indicator - A reactive measure based on events that have already occurred (for example, the number of SIF incidents or TRIR).
• Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) - A safety approach that focuses on improving systems and work design to account for human fallibility, rather than simply blaming individuals for mistakes.
• Near Miss - An unplanned event in which no injury occurred, but which had the potential to cause harm. A SIF near miss is a near miss with the potential for a serious or fatal outcome.

Aligning your terminology around these concepts helps everyone–from executives to field crews–speak the same language about serious risk. That shared understanding is a powerful foundation for reducing SIF exposure and keeping people safe.