Methods for Obtaining Feedback on your EH&S Program

Robert Emery, DrPH, CHP, CIH, CSP, RBP, CHMM, CPP, ARMVice President for Safety, Health, Environment & Risk ManagementThe University of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonProfessor of Occupational HealthThe University of Texas School of Public Health

Change in Focus

EH&S programs have changed in recent years

– Originally “command and control”, regulatory driven– Now service oriented, with goal to support the

organizational goals– Important to systematically obtain feedback to aid

strategeic planning efforts– Quantify the intangibles (goodwill value)

Soliciting Feedback

EH&S program feedback is typically obtained in four ways:– Unsolicited: usually complaints, rarely compliments– Training courses: smile sheets– A few generic questions as part of a larger

organizational survey– Passive link on website: “let us know how we did”

Previous Efforts

Previous client satisfaction work at UTHSC-H focused on routine safety surveillance program

Intended to evaluate staff performance in 5 historically problematic areas– Interruptions, – discourteous, – unknowledgeable, – not technically proficient, – and waste not picked up

Results overwhelmingly positive >90% approval ratings Unanticipated results – written comments: “thanks for asking!” Powerful tool for demonstrating program goodwill value to upper

management

Major Challenge

Feedback from surveys can be skewed or misleading if client expectations are not understood first

The trick is to first understand what client expectation are, and then to conduct operations accordingly

Two Types of Client Expectations

Realistic expectations that are perceived as not being achieved– Solution: recalibrate operations to meet

expectations

Unrealistic expectations that can never be met – Solution: educate client so that expectations can be

adjusted

Measuring Expectations and Perceptions

SERVQUAL tool

Developed by Parasuraman et al. under the auspices of the Marketing Science Institute

Research shows that customers evaluate firms by comparing service performance (perceptions) with service expectations

Five Dimensions of Service Quality

Tangibles – appearance of staff, facilities

Reliability – ability to perform promised service dependably and reliably

Responsiveness – willingness to help clients and provide prompt service

Assurance – knowledge and courtesy of staff which instills trust and confidence

Empathy – caring, individualized attention

SERVQUAL Tool

22 paired statements split into two sections– Expectations– Perceptions

Example: “When excellent cable TV companies promise to do something by a certain time, they will do it”

Each statement evaluated on a 7 point Leikert scale

Data summarized and graphically displayed, comparing expectations versus perceptions

Methods

Modified questionnaire developed, consisting of 7 paired statements about EH&S program services– Areas of concentration: reliability, responsiveness, assurance,

empathy

Distributed to 280 principle investigators in paper form with a personalized, signed cover memo

Survey form pre-labeled for return via campus mail

Results

By the end of a 3 week period, 32% return rate

Data entered into a spreadsheet and displayed graphically

Overtly displayed to various stakeholders!

Figure 1. UTHSCH laboratory personnel rating of the importance of certain service characteristics of "excellent" environmental health & safety programs, compared to their rating of the level of service currently being provided by UTHSCH EH&S.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Promise to do

Sincere

Prompt

Courteous

Knowledgeable

Convenient H

oursU

nderstand Needs

Excellent EH&SPrograms

Figure 1. UTHSCH laboratory personnel rating of the importance of certain service characteristics of "excellent" environmental health & safety programs, compared to their rating of the level of service currently being provided by UTHSCH EH&S.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0Excellent EH&SPrograms

UTHSCH EH&S

Benefits

Results provide tangible evidence of program meeting the expectations of an “excellent” EH&S program

Powerful leverage tool to gain needed resources

Written comments identified other areas of concern

Great for staff morale – feedback for work rarely acknowledged

Other Examples

• Clients who interact with Administrative Support Staff

• Clients of the Biological Safety Program

• Clients of Environmental Protection Program Services

• Employees and Supervisors Reporting Injuries

• Determining Management’s Level of “Informed Risk”

Administrative Support Staff Survey Results Summary distributed to 90 targeted faculty and staff clients across UTHSCH, with 54 responses in 30 days (60% response rate)

Questions Yes No N/A

Phone answered within 3 rings? 78% 2% 20%

Timely response to inquiries? 93% 2% 8%

Courteous response? 94% 3% 3%

If couldn’t answer, offer suggestions or alternatives?

66% 2% 34%

Administrative Support Program Client Satisfaction Survey (distributed to 90 targeted faculty and staff clients across UTHSCH, with 54 responses in 30 days (60% response rate)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Very lowproficiency

Lowproficiency

Avergeproficiency

Somew hatproficient

Veryproficient

Nu

mb

er

of

resp

on

ses

“ 7) Compared to other administrative personnel you interact with across UTHSCH, please indicate your impression of the level of proficiency of the EH&S Administrative Support Staff member demonstrates during your interaction with them”

Survey of Principal Investigators Utilizing EH&S Biological Safety Program Services Email based survey distributed from 4/29/2010 to 6/2/2010 to 210 Principal Investigators identified as utilizing biological safety services in FY 2010.

Survey response rate: 47 out of 210 (22%)

Survey Question Responses Yes No No Opinion

1. Do you feel the Biological Safety Program understands your needs and 44 (94%) 3 (6%) 0 (0%) requirements as a faculty member or researcher?

2. Do you feel you have adequate access to the Biological Safety Program via 47 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) phone and/or email?

3. Do you feel the Biological Safety Program responds to your requests in an 46 (98%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%) acceptable time frame?

4. Do you feel the Biological Safety Program has adequate professional knowledge 43 (93%) 2 (4%) 1 (2%) to address your needs related to biological safety? (n= 46 responses)

5. Do you feel the Biological Safety Program provides helpful and courteous service? 46 (98%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%)

6. Are you able to obtain assistance if you are having issues submitting an Institutional 34 (72%) 1 (2%) 12 (26%) Biosafety Committee protocol, renewal, or update?

7. In your opinion, do you feel that accessing the Institutional Biosafety Committee 31 (66%) 4 (9%) 12 (26%) protocol submission forms online is convenient?

8. Does the online Institutional Biosafety Committee protocol submission process 22 (49%) 7 (16%) 16 (36%) provide adequate instructions for completion of the forms? (n=45 responses)

9. Do you feel the online protocol submission system allows for easier initial 26 (55%) 5 (11%) 16 (34%) submissions, updates, and renewals of Institutional Biosafety Committee protocols as compared to the previous paper-based process?

Better Same Worse No Previous Experience

10. If you have been involved with Biological Safety Programs 21 (45%) 6 (13%) 1 (2%) 19 (40%) at other institutions, please rate how the service provided at UTHealth compares?

Survey of Principal Investigators Utilizing Environmental Protection Program Services in 2007

Email based Zoomerang survey distributed from 11/5/07 to 11/30/07 to 88 Principal Investigators identified as requesting hazardous waste disposal services in 2007. Survey response: 30 out of 88, for a 34% response rate

Services at UTHSC-H were:

7. If you have been involved with the disposal of hazardous wastes at other institutions, please rate how the service provided at UTHSC-H compares? Worse Same Better No Previous Experience

0 (0%) 2 (7%) 13 (45%) 14 (48%)

Written Comments: (1) Thanks for all your efforts. (2) You guys are doing a great job. Keep it up. (3) I greatly appreciated the hazardous waste services provided by EHS. (4) Great job! (5) EHS is an outstanding group of people and the operation is extremely user friendly. (6) Good job (7) I do not have a heavy load of wastes, so don’t interact often with this process, but every interaction and enquiry has been handled very well, rapidly and professionally. Excellent program.

Responses

Survey Question Yes No No Opinion

1. In your opinion, have you been provided with the information necessary (either through a training class, in person, or on the EHS webpage) for you to safely manage and dispose of the hazardous waste materials generated in your work area? 30 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

2. Does the provision of hazardous waste management supplies, such as containers, bags, and labels by EHS to your laboratory ease the process of complying with waste disposal procedures? 30 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

3. Are the necessary labels to identify the contents of the chemical, biological, or radioactive wastes easy to complete? 26 (90%) 0 (0%) 3 (10%)

4. Are you able to easily request hazardous waste pickups utilizing the current voice mail system? 25 (83%) 1 (3%) 4 (13%)

5. Would an online hazardous waste pickup request be a more desirable means of submitting request for waste collection? 17 (57%) 7 (23%) 6 (20%)

6. After placing a hazardous waste pickup request, have your chemical, biological, or liquid radioactive wastes been collected within the stated three day time period? 23 (77%) 2 (7%) 5 (17%)

No Care or Lost Time (18% response rate)

Care But No Lost Time (57% response rate)

Supervisors (13% response rate)

Was this the first time you have reported an injury or exposure at UTHSC-H? 67%(Y) 33%(N) 62%(Y) 38%(N) 37%(Y) 63%(N)

Prior to the recent reported injury event were you aware of your obligation to report any injury or exposure? 88%(Y) 12%(N) 88%(Y) 12%(N) 96%(Y) 4%(N)

Did you receive a copy of the completed first report of injury form? 70%(Y) 30%(N) 62%(Y) 38%(N) 96%(Y) 4%(N)

To your knowledge has the source of your injury or exposure been addressed? 81%(Y) 19%(N) 88%(Y) 12%(N) 88%(Y) 12%(N)

Did you encounter any issues with the reporting process that you didn’t know or anticipate? 12%(Y) 88%(N) 38%(Y) 62%(N) 27%(Y) 73%(N)

Our records indicate that you did not receive any health care in response to your injury or exposure. Who made the determination that health care was not needed?

72% Yourself 9% Supervisor 19% Other

Have you experienced any residual affects from your injury or exposure? 9%(Y) 91%(N) 12%(Y) 88%(N)

Where did you access health care? 53% Employee Health 20% Student Health 27% Other

Please indicate your impression of the level of service provided by the health care provider who addressed your injury or exposure?

38% Very Good 44% Good 6% Average 0% Poor 12% Very Poor

Were you able to easily access the necessary Supervisor's First Report of Injury form? 92%(Y) 8%(N)

If any assistance was needed in order to complete and submit the Supervisor's First Report of Injury form, was this assistance readily available?46% (Y) 8% (N) 46% (none needed)

Were you provided with the information needed for you to effectively manage the affected employee? 100%(Y) 0%(N)

Survey of Employees and Supervisors Filing UTHSC-H First Reports of Injury in 2007 (Email based Zoomerang survey for period February 2007 to August 31, 2007)

Injured Employees Requiring Care and Lost Time (n = 39): Not Included in survey, as each injured worker that accrues lost time is assigned a case manager to personally assist in the rehabilitation process.

Employees requiring care, but no lost time (n = 28)

Employees not requiring care, no lost time (n = 179)

Employee Population (not reporting any injuries, n = 4,181)

Did you know that….. ResponseYes No

When measured by dollar value of property loss, the most significant cause of property damage at the UTHSC-H is water? 63% 37%

The most common source of the water damage is not from hurricanes or discharges from sprinkler heads, but rather from overflowed sinks, drainage leaks, and leaks in water supply lines?

74% 26%

The deductible for the UTHSC-H property insurance policy is $250,000? 37% 63%

Personal property stolen or damaged while on UTHSC-H property is not covered by the UTHSC-H property insurance policy? 89% 11%

The insurance for UTHSC-H includes some amount of coverage for “business interruption” but only if the loss event is due to property damage at UTHSC-H?

63% 37%

When contracting with a firm to move furniture and equipment that the standard coverage for anything damaged in the course of the move is $0.60/lb?

16% 84%

“Special events” such as parties, catered gatherings and graduations are not covered by the standard UTHSC-H insurance policy, and require the purchase of a “Special Events Policy”?

32% 68%

If you are injured on the job and cannot work, Worker’s Compensation Insurance will likely not cover your full salary during the period you are unable to work?

84% 16%

If you drive your personal vehicle for work purposes and are involved in an accident, the primary insurance coverage is your personal auto insurance?

79% 21%

If something is stolen from your workplace you would report it to UT Police. But if property is damaged or lost in some other way, did you know you need to report that type of loss to Risk Management & insurance?

47% 53%

Gauge Your Level of “Informed Risk” In an attempt to gauge the level of informed risk across campus, an online survey was circulated to manager and supervisory-level personnel via various institutional e-mail list servs for the period August 24 to September 9, 2009. Summarized below are the collective responses by percent from 19 respondents. The results indicate that certain opportunities to enhance community education and awareness exist, and will be pursed in FY10 to help further reduce the amount of retained losses experienced by the institution. 

Summary

Institutional EH&S programs are service intensive operations

Important to understand client expectations before measuring satisfaction

Helps with strategic planning – what changes are necessary?

Formal surveys quantify intangibles Great way to capture and display program’s

goodwill value!

References

EMERY RJ, Brown BJ. Successfully capturing and displaying biosafety program ‘goodwill value’. Appl Biosaf 16: 60-61; 2010.

Emery, R.J., Sawyer, R.L., Sprau, D.D., "Assessing the Service Provided by an Institutional Radiation Safety Survey Program" Health Physics, 70(5): 741-743, 1996.

Emery, R.J., Savely, S., "The Benefits of Actively Soliciting Worker Concerns During Routine Safety Inspections" Professional Safety, 42(7): 36-38, 1997.

Emery, R.J., "Adding Value to Your Radiation Protection Program", Chapter in Roessler, C.E. Management and Administration of Radiation Safety Programs, Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI. 1998.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L., Zeithaml, V.A., Guidelines for measuring service industry quality. Marketing Research, American Marketing Association., December 1990

UTH

EHS