Workplace Safety and Health
OSHA's Voluntary Compliance Strategies Show Promising Results, but Should be Fully Evaluated Before They Are Expanded
Gao ID: GAO-04-378 March 19, 2004
Because the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) can inspect only a fraction of 7 million U.S. worksites each year in its efforts to ensure safe and healthy working conditions, the agency has increasingly supplemented enforcement with "voluntary compliance strategies" to reach more employers and employ its resources most effectively. GAO assessed the types of strategies used, the extent of their use, and their effectiveness. GAO also obtained suggestions from specialists for additional voluntary compliance strategies.
OSHA has implemented four voluntary programs, using a mix of strategies, that have extended its reach to a growing number of employers. For example, one program recognizes more than 1,000 worksites with exemplary records and practices while another focuses on hazardous industries, encouraging more than 200 employers to eliminate serious hazards. The agency plans to significantly expand its voluntary compliance programs over the next few years, although such expansion may tax its limited resources. OSHA's voluntary compliance programs appear to have yielded many positive outcomes, but the agency does not yet have adequate data to assess their individual and relative effectiveness. Employers and employees at nine worksites we visited attested to reductions in injuries and illnesses and improved relationships with one another and with OSHA. However, the agency has just begun to evaluate its programs and much of its data are insufficient for evaluation. For example, data on one program are inconsistent, making comparisons difficult, and goals for another program are individually developed and not readily measurable. The lack of such data makes it difficult for OSHA to articulate priorities and necessary resource allocations. The additional strategies that researchers and specialists suggested generally fell into four categories: providing more incentives to encourage additional employers to voluntarily improve workplace safety and health; promoting more systematic approaches to workplace safety and health; focusing more specifically on high-hazard, high-injury workplaces; and using third-party approaches to achieve voluntary compliance.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:
Team:
Phone:
GAO-04-378, Workplace Safety and Health: OSHA's Voluntary Compliance Strategies Show Promising Results, but Should be Fully Evaluated Before They Are Expanded
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-378
entitled 'Workplace Safety and Health: OSHA's Voluntary Compliance
Strategies Show Promising Results, but Should be Fully Evaluated Before
They Are Expanded' which was released on March 30, 2004.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Workforce Protections,
Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of Representatives:
United States General Accounting Office:
GAO:
March 2004:
Workplace Safety and Health:
OSHA's Voluntary Compliance Strategies Show Promising Results, but
Should Be Fully Evaluated before They Are Expanded:
GAO-04-378:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-378, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Workforce Protections, Committee on Education and the Workforce, House
of Representatives
Why GAO Did This Study:
Because the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) can
inspect only a fraction of 7 million U.S. worksites each year in its
efforts to ensure safe and healthy working conditions, the agency has
increasingly supplemented enforcement with ’voluntary compliance
strategies“ to reach more employers and employ its resources most
effectively. GAO assessed the types of strategies used, the extent of
their use, and their effectiveness. GAO also obtained suggestions from
specialists for additional voluntary compliance strategies.
What GAO Found:
OSHA has implemented four voluntary programs, using a mix of
strategies, that have extended its reach to a growing number of
employers. For example, one program recognizes more than 1,000
worksites with exemplary records and practices while another focuses on
hazardous industries, encouraging more than 200 employers to eliminate
serious hazards. The agency plans to significantly expand its voluntary
compliance programs over the next few years, although such expansion
may tax its limited resources.
OSHA‘s voluntary compliance programs appear to have yielded many
positive outcomes, but the agency does not yet have adequate data to
assess their individual and relative effectiveness. Employers and
employees at nine worksites we visited attested to reductions in
injuries and illnesses and improved relationships with one another and
with OSHA. However, the agency has just begun to evaluate its programs
and much of its data are insufficient for evaluation. For example, data
on one program are inconsistent, making comparisons difficult, and
goals for another program are individually developed and not readily
measurable. The lack of such data makes it difficult for OSHA to
articulate priorities and necessary resource allocations. The
additional strategies that researchers and specialists suggested
generally fell into four categories: providing more incentives to
encourage additional employers to voluntarily improve workplace safety
and health; promoting more systematic approaches to workplace safety
and health; focusing more specifically on high-hazard, high-injury
workplaces; and using third-party approaches to achieve voluntary
compliance.
What GAO Recommends:
To strengthen OSHA‘s use of its voluntary compliance strategies, GAO
recommends that the Secretary of Labor direct the Assistant Secretary
for Occupational Safety and Health to (1) identify cost-effective
methods of assessing the effectiveness of OSHA‘s voluntary compliance
programs and (2) develop a strategic framework that articulates the
priorities and resource allocations for the agency‘s voluntary
compliance programs before further expanding the use of these
strategies.
In its written comments on the draft report, OSHA generally agreed with
our findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-378.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Bob Robertson at (202)
512-7215 or robertsonr@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
OSHA Has Employed a Variety of Voluntary Compliance Strategies, Which
Has Extended the Agency's Reach to a Growing Number of Employers:
Voluntary Strategies Appear to Have Many Positive Outcomes, but the
Absence of Comprehensive Data Limits Assessment:
Researchers and Other Specialists Suggested a Variety of Additional
Voluntary Compliance Strategies:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration:
GAO Comments:
Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Summary of OSHA's Four Voluntary Compliance Programs:
Table 2: Additional Voluntary Compliance Strategies:
Figures:
Figure 1: Example of a SHARP Worksite:
Figure 2: Federal and State-Plan State VPP Worksites, by Industry:
Figure 3: Federal VPP Worksites, by Size of Employer:
Figure 4: Example of a VPP Worksite:
Figure 5: Example of a Strategic Partnership:
Figure 6: Strategic Partnership Programs in Federal OSHA States, by
Industry or Area of Emphasis:
Figure 7: Example of an Alliance:
Figure 8: Growth in Voluntary Compliance Programs, 1993 to 2003:
Figure 9: Use of OSHA's Budget for Fiscal Years 1996 to 2003, by
Program:
Figure 10: Links between Occupational Safety and Health and Workers'
Compensation Programs in Oregon and California:
Abbreviations:
OSH Occupational Safety and Health:
OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration:
SAFE Act: Safety Advancement for Employees Act of 1999:
SHARP: Safety and Health Achievement Recognition Program:
VPP: Voluntary Protection Programs:
United States General Accounting Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
March 19, 2004:
The Honorable Charles Norwood:
Chairman, Subcommittee on Workforce Protections:
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
House of Representatives:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Workplace injuries and illnesses affect millions of workers each year,
often changing their lives and reducing employers' profitability
through higher costs and lowered productivity. Ensuring safe and
healthy conditions at the 7 million U.S. worksites that employ 114
million workers is the responsibility of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA). The agency's enforcement program--
primarily conducting inspections of employers' worksites--has been the
foundation of its efforts to ensure compliance with federal laws and
regulations. However, OSHA can only inspect a small fraction of all
worksites each year. In 2002, for example, the agency and its state
counterparts conducted almost 96,000 inspections. Furthermore, the
growth in the number of worksites over time, as well as changes in the
workplace, have added to OSHA's challenge. To help meet its
responsibilities, the agency has increasingly supplemented its
enforcement efforts with "voluntary compliance strategies." These are
initiatives in which OSHA invites employers to work cooperatively with
the agency to protect the safety and health of workers. While in the
past enforcement has been the agency's predominant approach to
achieving its mission, voluntary strategies may provide important
opportunities to extend the agency's influence.
Given the desirability of reaching additional employers and employing
OSHA's resources most effectively, you asked us to provide you with
information on (1) the types of voluntary compliance strategies OSHA
uses to improve workplace safety and health and the extent to which it
reaches employers through these strategies, (2) the effectiveness of
these voluntary compliance strategies, and (3) additional strategies
that could further OSHA's mission to protect the safety and health of
workers. We focused our review on OSHA's four voluntary compliance
programs: the Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP), the State
Consultation Program, the Strategic Partnership Program, and the
Alliance Program.[Footnote 1]
To address these objectives, we reviewed the agency's strategic
management plan as it relates to these voluntary compliance programs;
analyzed budgetary, participant, and other data on program trends; and
reviewed the policies and procedures for each program, including data
reporting requirements. We reviewed evaluations of OSHA's voluntary
compliance programs as well as published research about these programs.
In addition, we obtained information about each program from officials
at OSHA headquarters and selected regional and area offices. To further
our understanding of the Alliance Program, we interviewed
representatives from several trade and professional organizations that
participate in the program. To further our understanding of the other
three programs, we visited participants in three geographically
dispersed federal OSHA states that represented different OSHA regions:
Georgia, Illinois, and Massachusetts. In each state, we visited three
employers--one that participated in the VPP, one in the State
Consultation Program, and one in the Strategic Partnership Program. At
each of these employers, we interviewed management and members of the
safety committee and conducted a focus group of employees not directly
involved with safety and health issues. Finally, we interviewed a broad
range of researchers and specialists from universities, professional
and trade associations, employee and employer organizations, and
consulting firms about the implementation and effectiveness of OSHA's
voluntary compliance strategies and analyzed their suggestions for
additional strategies for voluntary compliance. We conducted our work
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards
between March 2003 and February 2004.
Results in Brief:
OSHA has implemented its voluntary compliance strategies through four
programs, and compliance assistance activities, that have extended its
reach to a growing number of employers. While worksites directly
involved in these programs represent a small fraction of the 7 million
sites over which OSHA has authority, their numbers suggest an expansion
in the number of employers the agency is able to reach through
enforcement. OSHA's four voluntary compliance programs have involved
employers both directly and indirectly through trade and professional
associations. These programs represent a mix of strategies designed to
reach different types of employers, including those that recognize
employers with exemplary safety and health practices and programs
designed to address serious hazards in workplaces. The State
Consultation Program--a state-run, but largely OSHA-funded, program--
provides consultations, usually confidentially, to small businesses in
high-hazard industries and exempts worksites that meet certain
standards from routine inspections. Almost 29,000 consultation visits
were made in 2003 as a part of this program. The VPP recognizes
employers with exemplary safety records and practices by exempting them
from routine inspections. The VPP has grown substantially over the past
decade and currently includes over 1,000 worksites. The Strategic
Partnership Program encourages employers in hazardous industries to
develop measures for eliminating serious hazards. To date, there are
more than 200 partnerships. In the Alliance Program, OSHA has
collaborated with more than 160 organizations, such as trade and
professional associations, to promote better safety and health
practices for their members. To support all of its voluntary compliance
strategies, OSHA has increased the proportion of resources dedicated to
them from about 20 percent of its total budget in fiscal year 1996 to
about 28 percent in 2003. The agency also plans to expand its voluntary
compliance programs in the future, although national and regional OSHA
officials we interviewed acknowledged that doing so would be difficult
given the agency's current resources. For example, OSHA plans an eight-
fold increase in the number of worksites for the VPP, from 1,000 to
8,000.
OSHA's voluntary compliance programs have reduced injuries and
illnesses and yielded other benefits, according to participants, OSHA
officials, and occupational safety and health specialists, but the lack
of comprehensive data makes it difficult to fully assess the
effectiveness of these programs. Participants we interviewed in the
three states and nine worksites we visited told us they have
considerably reduced their rates of injury and illness. They also
attributed better working relationships with OSHA, improved
productivity, and decreased worker compensation costs to their
involvement in the voluntary compliance programs. However, much of the
information on program success was anecdotal, and OSHA's own evaluation
of program activities and impact has been limited to date. OSHA
currently does not collect complete, comparable data that would enable
a full evaluation of the effectiveness of its voluntary compliance
programs. For example, OSHA requires participants in the Strategic
Partnership Program to file annual reports but does not collect
consistent information about each partnership. The agency has begun
planning but has yet to develop performance measures to use in
evaluating the programs and a strategic framework that will allow it to
set priorities and effectively allocate its resources.
Researchers, safety and health practitioners, and other specialists we
interviewed suggested additional strategies for protecting the safety
and health of workers, some of which might require legislative changes.
Some might help OSHA leverage its existing resources; others could
require additional resources to implement. In broad terms, these
strategies would (1) provide incentives designed to encourage more
employers to voluntarily improve safety and health in the workplace;
(2) promote more systematic approaches to workplace safety and health;
(3) focus more of OSHA's voluntary efforts on high-hazard, high-injury
workplaces; and (4) use third-party approaches to conduct safety and
health evaluations or develop voluntary safety and health standards.
While these strategies were offered as being potentially useful, the
specialists also acknowledged that some could necessitate additional
safeguards, oversight, and enforcement. For example, using financial
incentives such as tax credits could encourage employers to make safety
and health improvements, but they could also entail lost tax revenue
and "improvements" whose safety or health outcomes are difficult to
substantiate. Furthermore, in its efforts to implement similar
strategies in the past, OSHA experienced regulatory and legal
challenges that would have to be considered carefully in implementing
some of these strategies.
We are recommending that the Secretary of Labor direct the Assistant
Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health to strengthen OSHA's
voluntary compliance strategies by identifying cost-effective ways of
obtaining data for evaluation and by developing a strategic framework
that sets priorities and identifies resource allocations among these
programs, before further expanding them. We are not making
recommendations on any strategies proposed by researchers and
specialists we interviewed.
In its written comments on our draft report, OSHA generally agreed with
our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. In addition, we
received technical comments from OSHA officials, which we incorporated
in the report as appropriate.
Background:
Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act in 1970 to
ensure safe and healthy working conditions for every worker in the
nation. OSHA has responsibility for enforcing the provisions of the
act, including overseeing most worksites, with the exception of some
small employers in low-hazard industries and small farming operations.
OSHA has direct enforcement responsibility for about half the states;
the remainder have been granted authority for their own enforcement. At
present, 22 states have been approved by OSHA to operate their own
programs covering all worksites; 4 are approved for covering public
sector employee worksites only; and OSHA directly oversees all
worksites in the remaining states.[Footnote 2]
OSHA uses two approaches to ensure compliance with federal safety and
health laws and regulations--enforcement and voluntary compliance.
Enforcement, which represents the preponderance of agency activity, is
carried out primarily by using compliance officers to inspect employer
worksites. Worksites and employers whose conditions fail to meet
federal safety and health standards face sanctions, such as paying
penalties for violations of health and safety standards. In this
enforcement capacity, OSHA targets employers for inspection using
injury and illness rates for industries and specific worksites. For
example, it has targeted the construction industry for inspections
because of high injury and illness rates. OSHA also conducts
inspections when employers report fatalities or serious injuries and
when workers file complaints about serious safety and health hazards.
The voluntary compliance approach, in contrast, invites employers to
collaborate with the agency and uses a variety of incentives to
encourage them to reduce hazards and institute practices that will
foster safer and healthier working conditions. Such incentives include
free consultations, exemption from routine inspections, and recognition
for exemplary safety and health systems.
To participate in voluntary compliance programs, employers must also
meet certain requirements, which often include the adoption of some
form of safety and health management program--a program that takes a
systems approach to preventing and controlling workplace
hazards.[Footnote 3] OSHA has four basic requirements for a safety and
health management program:
(1) Management Leadership and Employee Involvement--Top-level
management must be committed to carrying out written comprehensive
safety and health programs. Employees must be actively involved in the
execution of the program.
(2) Worksite Analysis--Employers must have a thorough understanding of
all hazardous situations to which employees may be exposed, as well as
the ability to recognize and correct these hazards.
(3) Hazard Prevention and Controls--The program must have clear
procedures for preventing and controlling hazards identified through
worksite analysis, such as a hazard tracking system and a written
system for monitoring and maintaining workplace equipment.
(4) Safety and Health Training--Training is necessary to reinforce and
complement management's commitment to safety and health and to ensure
that all employees understand how to avoid exposure to hazards.
To keep pace with the increasing demands on OSHA staff to help
administer and promote voluntary compliance programs, in 2001 OSHA
created the new position of "compliance assistance specialist."
According to OSHA officials, funding for this position was authorized
in fiscal year 2002. Compliance assistance specialists provide general
information about OSHA standards and promote voluntary compliance
programs, as well as OSHA's compliance assistance resources, such as
training and Web site resources. They also respond to requests for help
from a variety of groups and participate in numerous seminars,
workshops, and speaking events. Most specialists are former OSHA
compliance officers who conducted inspections of employers' worksites.
In their new positions, the specialists are not involved in OSHA's
enforcement activities. There is one Compliance Assistant Specialist
position in each OSHA area office in states under federal jurisdiction,
with a total of 65 in fiscal year 2003.
OSHA's strategic management plan identifies particular safety and
health problems and industries on which to focus the agency's efforts.
In its current 5-year plan for years 2003 through 2008, one of the
agency's three goals is to promote a safety and health culture through
compliance assistance, cooperative programs, and strong leadership.
This goal includes increasing the number of participants in voluntary
compliance programs and improving the programs' effectiveness. Another
goal is to reduce occupational hazards by, for example, reducing the
rate of workplace injuries and illnesses by 5 percent annually. OSHA's
third goal focuses on strengthening the agency's capabilities and
infrastructure, including improving the agency's access to accurate,
timely data, and enhancing its measures for assessing the effectiveness
of its programs.
OSHA Has Employed a Variety of Voluntary Compliance Strategies, Which
Has Extended the Agency's Reach to a Growing Number of Employers:
OSHA's voluntary compliance strategies--four programs plus compliance
assistance activities such as education and outreach--have expanded the
agency's reach to a growing number of employers. The agency's four
programs reach a range of employers and use a mix of strategies. They
target both exemplary worksites and hazardous ones, and they influence
employers directly by implementing safety and health programs and
indirectly through collaboration with trade and professional
associations. Some programs offer employers incentives to participate,
such as a reduced chance of on-site inspection or special recognition
for safety and health programs. Two of the programs were officially
introduced in the last decade, adding to the number of participants
engaged in voluntary compliance. OSHA plans to dramatically increase
the number of employers and organizations participating in voluntary
compliance programs. However, OSHA officials expressed concerns that
such plans for expansion could tax the agency's limited resources.
Voluntary Compliance Programs Are Designed to Reach a Range of
Employers:
OSHA's voluntary compliance programs have been implemented
incrementally to reach different employers and worksites in various
ways. They represent a mix of strategies to help improve workplace
conditions (see table 1).[Footnote 4]
Table 1: Summary of OSHA's Four Voluntary Compliance Programs:
Program/year established: State Consultation Program; 1975;
Target participants: Small businesses in high-hazard industries;
Program description: Free, usually confidential reviews of employers'
worksites to identify hazards and abatement techniques;
OSHA oversight: Program operates in all states and is run by state
governments, but funded mainly by OSHA.
Program/year established: Voluntary Protection Programs; 1982;
Target participants: Single worksites typically with injury and illness
rates below average for their industry sector;
Program description: Recognizes worksites that have safety and health
programs with specific features that exceed OSHA standards;
OSHA oversight: Employers must pass a weeklong on-site worksite review
by OSHA personnel;
Participants complete yearly self-evaluations;
OSHA recertifies worksites every 1 to 5 years.
Program/year established: Strategic Partnership Program[A]; 1998;
Target participants: Priority for participation is given to groups of
employers and employees in high-hazard workplaces, with a focus on
employers working at multiple worksites;
Program description: Flexible agreements between OSHA and partners to
address a specific safety and health problem;
OSHA oversight: OSHA conducts verification inspections for a percentage
of partner worksites to ensure compliance with the partnership
agreement.
Program/year established: Alliance Program; 2002;
Target participants: Trade and professional organizations, employers,
labor unions, governmental organizations;
Program description: Agreements with organizations that focus on
training, outreach, and promoting the consciousness of safety and
health issues;
OSHA oversight: OSHA meets quarterly with participants to ensure
progress toward alliance goals is being met.
Source: GAO analysis.
[A] While OSHA had partnership agreements prior to 1998, the Strategic
Partnership Program was not formalized until that year.
[End of table]
In addition to these formal programs, OSHA conducts other compliance
assistance activities, such as outreach and training activities, to aid
employers in complying with OSHA standards and to educate employers on
what constitutes a safe and healthy work environment.
State Consultation Program:
The State Consultation Program, begun in 1975, operates in every state.
Its primary focus is to help small businesses employed in high-hazard
industries comply with OSHA standards and address their methods for
dealing with worksite safety.[Footnote 5] The agency funds all state
governments to carry out the program. In fiscal year 2003, OSHA
provided $53 million to state governments. States provide free
consultation visits at employers' requests to identify safety and
health hazards and discuss techniques for their abatement. In fiscal
year 2003, state agents conducted about 28,900 consultation
visits.[Footnote 6] The names of employers receiving consultation
visits are kept confidential and separate from OSHA enforcement
officials.[Footnote 7] Depending on an employer's request, a state
consultant may conduct a full safety and health hazard assessment of
all working conditions, equipment, and processes at the worksite, or he
or she may focus solely on one particular hazard or work process.
Employers receive a detailed written report of the consultation
findings and agree upon a time frame for eliminating the hazards.
Small employers receiving consultation visits may qualify for
recognition in the Safety and Health Achievement Recognition Program
(SHARP), which exempts them from general, scheduled inspections for 1
or 2 years as models for good safety and health practices.[Footnote 8]
Participants in SHARP must have safety and health programs, which are
management programs, in place to prevent and control occupational
hazards. In fiscal year 2003, there were 699 SHARP worksites in both
federal OSHA states and state-plan states. Although SHARP worksites are
exempt from scheduled inspections, they are still subject to
inspections resulting from employee complaints and other serious safety
and health problems, such as fatalities.
Figure 1: Example of a SHARP Worksite:
We visited a SHARP worksite that employed approximately 40 workers
involved in the manufacture of equipment and facilities used to produce
hydrogen. The facility's impetus for joining SHARP was a push from new
corporate management that saw the facility's safety processes as not
adequate. Additionally, management at the facility was increasingly
recognizing that their clients were interested in their safety records
and that it was an important means of attracting new work. Since
joining the program, the company has undergone significant changes in
its safety and health procedures and has made significant improvements
to the facility. For example, the facility installed an expensive
sprinkler system in a new building on the worksite that was not
required by the fire department because of a suggestion made by a state
consultant. Although the facility's management did not think the
building posed a safety threat to workers, the SHARP status meant
enough to them that they chose to install the expensive system.
Employees at the facility commented that the SHARP status is a source
of pride for them and that employees remind each other about the
importance of safety issues.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of figure]
Voluntary Protection Programs:
The Voluntary Protection Programs, established in 1982, are designed to
recognize single worksites with exemplary safety and health programs.
As of September 30, 2003, there were a total of 1,024 VPP worksites in
both federal OSHA and state-plan states.[Footnote 9] The manufacturing
and chemical industries comprise 21 percent and 20 percent of these
recognized worksites, respectively (see fig. 2).
Figure 2: Federal and State-plan State VPP Worksites, by Industry:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
The majority of VPP worksites in federal OSHA states have more than 200
employees (see fig. 3). While the VPP does not specifically target
large businesses, they tend to be the businesses that attain VPP
status. According to an OSHA official, this trend is due to the fact
that large businesses tend to have staff and expertise available for a
comprehensive safety and health program.
Figure 3: Federal VPP Worksites, by Size of Employer:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
To participate in VPP, employers must have worksites that exceed OSHA
standards and they must commit to a process of continual improvement.
Employers achieving all VPP requirements are designated as Star VPP
worksites, which signifies the highest level of workplace safety and
health.[Footnote 10] As of September 30, 2003, 92 percent of all VPP
worksites in federal OSHA states have Star designation.[Footnote 11] To
be eligible for this exemplary status, employers must meet a number of
specific requirements for their worksite: (1) worksite injury and
illness rates must be below the average rate for their industry sector
for at least 1 of the 3 most recent years; (2) a safety and health
program must have been implemented and maintained for at least 1 year;
and (3) worksites must undergo and pass a comprehensive review by OSHA
personnel, including an on-site review of the facility and interviews
with management officials and employees. In exchange for OSHA
recognition, VPP worksites are exempt from scheduled enforcement
inspections. However, VPP worksites are still subject to inspections
resulting from employee complaints and other significant events, such
as fatalities.
Figure 4: Example of a VPP Worksite:
At a food processing VPP Star worksite we visited, management credited
the VPP with reducing employee injuries, helping to decrease workers'
compensation premiums by more than $200,000, and creating more trust
between employees and management. The facility has been part of VPP for
over 4 years and has implemented a safety and health program to
alleviate and control workplace hazards. Management acknowledged
employee involvement as the key to their successful program. Employees
participate in a number of safety and health committees and meet weekly
to discuss issues that surface regarding safety and health.
Additionally, employees conduct safety and health training courses for
other employees and participate in tours of other facilities to acquire
new ideas for improving safety and health practices at their worksite.
An employee we spoke with said that there have been major changes in
employees' and management's attitudes about safety and health since the
facility has been part of the VPP program and another employee noted
that safety now encompasses almost all aspects of his job.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of figure]
To attract additional VPP worksites and expand the overall program,
OSHA has recently announced three new VPP initiatives:
* VPP Challenge: a program that will serve as a roadmap to help
employers, particularly small employers, achieve VPP status regardless
of their current level of safety and health.
* VPP Corporate: a program that offers a more streamlined application
process for corporations that already have worksites in VPP and want to
bring additional worksites into the program.
* VPP Construction: a program that builds on information learned at
previous VPP demonstration worksites and is designed to make it easier
for construction worksites, particularly temporary worksites, to apply
for and attain VPP status by, for example, reducing the amount of time
that safety and health improvements must be in place.[Footnote 12]
Strategic Partnership Program:
The Strategic Partnership Program, formalized in 1998, is designed to
help groups of employers and employees working at multiple worksites in
high-hazard workplaces to address a specific safety and health problem.
As of September 2003, 66 percent of partnerships are construction-
related. A partnership agreement sets goals, such as the reduction of
injuries, specifies a plan for achieving them, and provides procedures
for verifying their completion. Some partnership agreements may also
require the development of a safety and health management program and
the involvement of employees in carrying out the partnership agreement.
The program does not offer exemption from enforcement inspections but
does offer other incentives. These include limiting scheduled
inspections on only the most serious prevailing hazards, penalty
reductions for any hazards cited during an inspection, and priority
consideration for the State Consultation Program.
Figure 5: Example of a Strategic Partnership:
A collection of roofing contractors we visited formed a Strategic
Partnership with four OSHA area offices to address hazards in the
roofing industry. A partner told us that the partnership improved
communication between OSHA and the contractors and allowed them to
develop a mutually agreeable solution to a safety and health problem.
He noted an example of a kettle used to melt roofing materials that was
located on the roof of a high-rise building that caused a fire. As a
result of this accident, OSHA prohibited roofing companies from using
kettles on roofs to melt roofing materials. The roofers told OSHA that
they needed to use these kettles on high-rise buildings to perform
their jobs and used the Strategic Partnership as a vehicle to discuss
their concerns with OSHA. As a result of these discussions, OSHA and
the roofers developed a 10-step plan that allows roofers to put kettles
on roofs with some new safety precautions. A partner commented that
they intend to continue to use the Strategic Partnership as a way to
work collaboratively with OSHA to address future concerns that arise.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of figure]
Partnerships can be developed on an area, regional, or national basis.
When a national partnership is established, it must be implemented in
all area and regional OSHA offices where a partner has a worksite. For
example, the Associated Builders and Contractors created a national
Strategic Partnership with OSHA that was implemented at the local level
between the association's chapters and area and regional OSHA offices.
As of September 2003, there were 205 operating Strategic Partnerships
in federal OSHA states, about 87 percent of which represented
industries or areas of emphasis in OSHA's Strategic Management Plan
(see fig. 6).[Footnote 13]
Figure 6: Strategic Partnership Programs in Federal OSHA States, by
Industry or Area of Emphasis:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
OSHA officials attributed the fact that so many partnerships are
construction-related to the national partnership with the Associated
Builders and Contractors. This partnership provided a template from
which other construction partnerships were developed. Additionally,
OSHA officials informed us that, because it was originally difficult
for construction worksites to enter into VPP, employers in the industry
who wanted to enter into a voluntary compliance program with OSHA had
tended to form a strategic partnership. While a few strategic
partnerships are very large, most participating worksites are small
businesses with 50 or fewer employees.
Alliance Program:
The Alliance Program targets trade, professional, and other types of
organizations to work collaboratively with OSHA to promote workplace
safety and health issues.[Footnote 14] Alliances can be formed through
national or regional offices. As of September 2003, approximately 51
percent of OSHA's national alliances were with trade associations and
38 percent were with professional associations.[Footnote 15] The
Alliance Program, which included 100 alliances as of September 2003, is
one of OSHA's newest and least structured voluntary compliance
programs. In contrast to the other three voluntary compliance programs
which typically include safety and health programs at specific employer
worksites, alliance agreements focus on goals such as training,
outreach, and increasing awareness of workplace safety and health
issues. To date, alliances have participated in a variety of
activities, such as (1) creating electronic informational tools that
have been posted on the OSHA Web site, (2) developing industry-specific
voluntary guidelines and training materials, and (3) improving OSHA's
training courses. Alliance members are not exempt from OSHA inspections
and do not receive any enforcement-related incentives for joining an
alliance. Instead, OSHA officials informed us that trade and
professional associations have used the Alliance Program as a proactive
method of addressing existing and emerging workplace safety and health
issues, such as ergonomic issues. As of September 2003, 41 percent of
OSHA's national alliances were ergonomic-related. See figure 7 for an
example of an ergonomic-related alliance.
Figure 7: Example of an Alliance:
Thirteen different national airlines came together to form an alliance
with OSHA to address the ergonomic issues related to baggage handling.
A representative of the alliance that we spoke with commented that he
saw the alliance as a tool for addressing long-term concerns of the
industry, such as, poorly designed airports that lead to ergonomic
injuries for employees. He also noted that the airlines believe that by
working together it sends a stronger message to airport owners for
improved workspaces that will not injure employees. The alliance also
has accomplished some shorter-term goals. For example, in September
2003, the alliance revised an electronic information tool on the OSHA
Web page that educates airline employees on how to avoid hazards in
handling baggage. The tool uses graphics to provide employees with
visual training examples of how to properly lift baggage to avoid
injury. Other airlines that are not involved with the alliance have
expressed an interest in either joining the alliance or learning more
about it.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of figure]
Other Voluntary Compliance Efforts:
In addition to its voluntary compliance programs, OSHA conducts
numerous training and outreach activities on a variety of safety and
health issues. These activities augment both the voluntary compliance
programs and OSHA's enforcement program, according to OSHA officials.
For example, outreach activities can be conducted in relation to
inspections, in an attempt to help employers ready themselves for an
inspection. The OSHA Training Institute offers 80 courses on a range of
safety and health issues, most of which are available to the public as
well as to OSHA employees for training. In fiscal year 2003, however,
the majority of its almost 5,000 students were OSHA employees. In
addition to the Training Institute, OSHA has 33 Education Centers,
nonprofit organizations (mostly universities), which have agreements
with OSHA to teach 16 of the most popular Training Institute courses.
An agency official told us that using these Education Centers around
the country has allowed OSHA to greatly expand the amount of nonagency
personnel who receive training in safety and health issues. In fiscal
year 2003, these centers trained almost 16,000 students, approximately
98 percent of whom were non-OSHA personnel. Through a grant program,
the agency also distributes some funds to nonprofit organizations to
develop training or educational programs about safety and health issues
of current emphasis in OSHA's Strategic Management Plan.[Footnote 16]
In fiscal year 2003, OSHA funded 67 such training grants totaling over
$11 million.
The agency provides outreach to employers and workers in a number of
other ways, such as through newsletters, brochures, compact discs,
speeches, and conferences. OSHA also mails materials on specific safety
and health issues to target audiences. Regional officials we spoke with
said that several OSHA staff are called upon to conduct outreach
efforts because it requires specialized skills and knowledge of
standards. OSHA also works in cooperation the U.S. Small Business
Administration's Small Business Development Centers.[Footnote 17]
Additionally, OSHA recently revised its Web site, which provides
informational tools and referrals on a variety of safety and health
issues. For example, OSHA has a Web service entitled "eTools," which
offers detailed graphics about specific worksite hazards, how to remedy
them, and how OSHA regulations apply to worksites.
Participation in Voluntary Compliance Has Grown in the Past Decade, and
OSHA Plans Dramatic Increases:
While voluntary compliance strategies directly reach relatively few of
the nation's employers, participant numbers have grown since 1998 with
the build-up of programs. Also, in the last decade, most of the
programs have experienced tremendous growth in the number of employers
and organizations that participate.[Footnote 18] For example, the VPP
has increased from 122 worksites in 1993 to 1,024 worksites in 2003, an
increase of 739 percent, and the Strategic Partnership Program grew
from 39 partnerships in 1998 to 205 existing partnerships in 2003, a
426 percent increase.[Footnote 19] (See fig. 8.):
Figure 8: Growth in Voluntary Compliance Programs, 1993 to 2003:
[See PDF for image]
[A] Although the State Consultation Program began in 1975, data are
only available starting in 1998 for the SHARP consultation worksites
because of changes in SHARP's program requirements. Figure 8 represents
only SHARP worksites in federal OSHA states.
[B] The number of Strategic Partnerships reflects a cumulative total
for federal OSHA states.
[C] Alliances can represent many different employers.
[End of figure]
OSHA plans to expand the number of voluntary compliance program
participants and its compliance assistance activities and has
established strategic goals for doing so. According to OSHA officials,
the agency's fiscal year 2004 goals include the addition of 45 new VPP
worksites and 50 VPP Challenge worksites, as well as 50 new strategic
partnerships and 75 new alliances[Footnote 20]. Furthermore, OSHA
officials have set a target goal of increasing the number of VPP
worksites eight-fold--from 1,000 worksites to 8,000 worksite[Footnote
21]s.:
Although it is difficult to quantify, the voluntary compliance programs
appear to have extended the agency's influence. For example, through
the agency's enforcement program, OSHA and its state partners conducted
almost 96,000 inspections in 2002--reaching no more than and probably
fewer than 96,000 worksites. The VPP and Strategic Partnership Program
in 2003 directly reached some 6,000 employers, who may not have
otherwise been selected for OSHA inspections. These two programs,
together with the State Consultation Program, covered approximately 2.3
million of the more than 100 million employees under OSHA's oversight.
Additionally, although OSHA may not have direct contact with an
employer as part of its Alliance Program or training and outreach
activities, employers are reached indirectly through the dissemination
of safety and health information, which, according to our discussions
with Alliance participants, has helped employees learn about workplace
safety and health issues.
OSHA's Expansion of Voluntary Compliance Programs May Tax Its Limited
Resources:
The resources OSHA devotes to its voluntary compliance strategies
consume a significant and growing portion of the agency's limited
resources. In fiscal year 2003, OSHA executed its numerous programs
under a $450 million budget. The agency spent $126 million on its
voluntary compliance programs and compliance assistance activities--
approximately 28 percent of its total budget--and about $254 million,
about 56 percent of its budget, on enforcement activities.[Footnote 22]
The percentage of resources dedicated to voluntary compliance programs
and compliance assistance activities has increased by approximately 8
percent since 1996, when these programs represented about 20 percent of
the agency's budget.[Footnote 23] During this same period, the
proportion of resources OSHA dedicated to its enforcement activities
fell by 6 percent, from about 63 percent to about 56 percent of the
agency's total budget, although the total funds devoted to enforcement
have remained fairly constant because of increases in OSHA's total
budget over this period.[Footnote 24] In addition, enforcement efforts,
as measured by the number of inspections, have remained constant or
increased slightly each year, according to agency officials. While it
cannot be determined that resources were directly redistributed from
enforcement to compliance assistance activities, funding for OSHA's
other programs remained relatively stable, with only small increases or
decreases in funding since 1996 (see fig. 9).
Figure 9: Use of OSHA's Budget for Fiscal Years 1996 to 2003, by
Program:
[See PDF for image]
Note: The budget values in this figure represent actual values for
fiscal years 1996 through 2003. In fiscal year 1997, OSHA changed the
way in which it accounts for its budgetary resources. However, we
obtained actual budget values for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 from the
Budget of the U.S. Government for fiscal years 1998 and 1999,
respectively, which took into account these changes.
[A] Dollars were adjusted to 2003 values using the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) Price Index. The GDP Price Index was recalculated to make
2003 the base year by dividing the index for a given year by the 2003
index. For example, to calculate the index using a base year for 2003,
the formula to recalculate 1991 is (0.8430/1.0585).
[B] "Other programs" includes "Safety and Health Standards," "Technical
Support," "Safety and Health Statistics," and "Executive Direction and
Administration.":
[End of figure]
Notwithstanding their voluntary nature, all of OSHA's voluntary
compliance programs require agency oversight to ensure that
participants comply with requirements or agreements and this growing
administrative responsibility requires concerted agency resources. For
example:
* To certify a worksite as a VPP worksite requires a comprehensive on-
site review that usually lasts 1 week and involves approximately three
to five OSHA personnel. In contrast to the SHARP on-site review, VPP
employers use their own resources to implement their safety and health
programs and the program must be functional before OSHA personnel come
to the worksite to conduct the on-site review for Star approval.
Additionally, OSHA reviews participants' yearly self-evaluations to
ensure that injury and illness rates have not increased beyond program
requirements and any changes that have been made to the safety and
health program. Furthermore, VPP worksites must be recertified every 1
to 5 years, depending on their VPP designation. A VPP worksite
recertification involves an additional on-site review by OSHA
personnel, similar in duration and comprehensiveness to the original
on-site review.
* In the Strategic Partnership Program, OSHA conducts verification
inspections for a percentage of partner worksites to ensure that
partners are abiding by the partnership agreement.
* The Alliance Program involves quarterly meetings with Alliance
members to ensure progress towards alliance goals are being met.
Additionally, OSHA training staff reviews all alliance training
materials to ensure their accuracy with OSHA standards.
Furthermore, while the State Consultation Program is run by the states,
OSHA largely funds the program, and its plans to expand the SHARP
program will require additional agency resources and oversight on the
part of state consultants. State consultants must work closely with
employers to help them improve and implement their safety and health
programs because most small employers do not have the resources
necessary to attain SHARP status on their own. The consultant also must
conduct a one-or-more day on-site review of the worksite to ensure that
the employer has addressed all workplace hazards and properly
implemented a safety and health program. Additionally, SHARP worksites
are reevaluated every 1 to 2 years, depending on the amount of time a
worksite has been in the program and the recommendation of the state
consultant. These reevaluations require another on-site review of the
worksite by the state consultants.
Expansion of OSHA's voluntary compliance programs as planned will
further require such resources, particularly for the oversight of a
much larger number of program participants. According to national and
regional OSHA officials we spoke with, expanding the voluntary
compliance programs to the intended levels will be difficult given
OSHA's current resources, and some expressed concern that too much
expansion of some programs may compromise program quality. Of
particular concern to them, they said, has been the agency's continued
focus on increasing the number of VPP worksites. Several regional
officials--whose offices are responsible for conducting on-site
reviews--said that increasing the number of VPP worksites would strain
their resources because of the number of staff required to conduct
reviews of new worksites and re-certifications of existing worksites.
To date, regional offices have been creative in their methods of
handling the increasing number of participants in voluntary compliance
programs. For instance, the offices have relied increasingly on the use
of the Special Government Employee Program and the Mentoring Program,
both a part of the VPP. The first allows employees from VPP worksites,
at the expense of their employers, to assist OSHA employees in
conducting on-site reviews. OSHA uses the Mentoring Program to match
VPP candidates with VPP employers, who assist the candidates in
improving their safety and health programs and preparing for the on-
site reviews. These two programs allow OSHA to leverage its resources
by using employees at VPP worksites to assist OSHA in carrying out the
responsibilities involved in operating the program, decreasing the
number of OSHA personnel needed.
While several regional OSHA officials said these strategies have
allowed them to manage the increase in VPP applicants, they are unsure
how many more they can accommodate without obtaining additional
resources.
Voluntary Strategies Appear to Have Many Positive Outcomes, but the
Absence of Comprehensive Data Limits Assessment:
While OSHA's voluntary compliance strategies have increased the number
of worksites the agency reaches, and participants and others have
provided enthusiastic testimony regarding their ability to foster
better safety and health practices, the lack of comprehensive data on
the outcomes of the programs has hindered our ability to assess their
effectiveness. Employers we visited said their participation had
reduced injury and illness rates, which in turn had lowered their
workers' compensation costs. These employers and many employees we
interviewed also credited OSHA's voluntary compliance programs with
improving employee-management relationships and their relationships
with the agency. However, although OSHA has begun to collect data on
the impact of some of its voluntary compliance programs, it does not
yet have the data needed to assess the effectiveness of these programs,
or make decisions about how to allocate its resources among the
programs.
Participants, OSHA Managers, and Specialists Cited Reduced Injuries and
Illnesses and Other Benefits:
The employers and employees at the worksites we visited, OSHA
officials, and researchers and occupational safety and health
specialists identified many benefits of OSHA's voluntary compliance
programs.
Reduced Injuries and Illnesses for Participating Employers:
The most commonly cited benefit of participating in OSHA's voluntary
compliance programs was the reduction in the number and rate of
injuries and illnesses. All nine employers we visited[Footnote 25]
reported that the number of injuries and illnesses at their worksites
had declined since they began participating in the programs. For
example, one VPP site in the paper industry reported that it typically
had 12 to 14 accidents that resulted in injuries each year before
working toward VPP approval, but that the worksite has reduced that
number to 5 accidents or fewer in the last 3 years. Another
participant, a partnership comprising eight nursing homes, reported in
its annual evaluation that the injury and illness rate for its second
year of participation had decreased 27 percent. OSHA, based on limited
analysis of VPP sites' annual injury and illness data, reported that
participating employers that had effectively implemented workplace
safety and health programs had significantly fewer injuries and
illnesses--54 percent fewer--than comparable worksites in the same
industries that had not implemented such programs.
Lower Costs:
A second benefit of voluntary compliance programs is decreased costs to
employers, primarily through reductions in workers' compensation
premiums.[Footnote 26] Employers at the sites we visited reported that
they had seen significant decreases in their workers' compensation
costs. For example, a meat packaging facility we visited estimated
workers' compensation costs savings of about $200,000 during the period
in which it had been involved with VPP. In addition to lowered workers'
compensation costs, employers commented that improvements in safety and
health had reduced employers' cost of lowered productivity that
resulted from employees missing work because of injuries and illnesses.
Although OSHA has information on its Web site on how reducing injuries
such as by implementing safe procedures can save employers money, it
does not include information on specific industries. OSHA officials
told us that, although the experiences of some companies in saving
money through safety improvements could be helpful to other employers,
some companies are reluctant to share their data on cost savings with
OSHA. However, the agency is developing some of the information through
its Alliance Program. For example, the objectives of one alliance with
a health care company include developing and incorporating materials
into business school curricula that communicate the business value and
competitive advantages associated with implementing comprehensive
safety and health programs in the workplace.
Improved Relationships with OSHA and between Employers and Employees:
According to employers and employees at worksites we visited, voluntary
compliance programs also improved their relationships with OSHA and
improved the relationships between management officials and employees.
At every worksite we visited, representatives told us they were very
comfortable with interacting with OSHA. Some spoke of a change from
fearing OSHA's visits to seeing them as helpful. For example,
management officials at a steel erector company commented that, before
their partnership, management did not want to talk to OSHA and dreaded
its visits whereas, after participating in the partnership, they have a
good relationship with OSHA staff. Several representatives at the
worksites we visited also commented that they now regularly call OSHA
for answers to safety problems. Some employees at the sites also
commented that they have seen improved relationships with OSHA. For
example, the union president at a VPP site said that, as a result of
the close interaction with OSHA staff during the VPP approval process,
he feels comfortable calling OSHA directly to discuss safety and health
issues.
Similarly, employees and employers at several worksites gave examples
of how their participation in these programs resulted in improved
relationships between management and employees. One safety director for
a union involved in a partnership said that after some workers were
fired for not complying with safety rules, they came to the union
looking for support, but because of the involvement of the union in the
partnership, the union supported the disciplinary action. Both
management and employees recounted how important working together was
during the approval process and how those efforts have continued in
order to maintain their participation in the programs, often through
team meetings and safety committee meetings.
Increased Responsibility for Safety by Management and Employees:
Employers and employees at the workplaces we visited also reported a
shift to a safety culture in which they all take responsibility for
safety, thereby contributing to improved productivity, morale, and
product quality. At all the sites we visited, employees spoke of being
empowered to remind others to comply with safety requirements. Several
described a shift in attitude from noncompliance to one in which good
safety procedures, such as wearing appropriate personal protective
equipment and inspecting equipment, were ingrained in daily activities.
They also said that they felt good that management had made the
additional investment in safety. In addition, management officials at
several sites said that this increased attention to safety had
benefited their firm in other ways. Some mentioned that others using
their services reviewed the company's safety records or training, and
that the company's recognition as an exemplary site gave them a
competitive advantage. For example, management officials at one SHARP
site whose workers construct facilities on their clients' worksites
said that the SHARP certification helped the company continue to get
contracts for projects. At one VPP site, management representatives
also told us that participation had brought an improved workplace ethic
where employees felt management cared about them, lower absenteeism
rates, and a more disciplined approach to work.
Safety and Health Improvements for Nonparticipating Employers:
In addition to the more anticipated benefits of improving injury and
illness rates and reducing employers' costs, participants commented
that VPP, SHARP, and Strategic Partnership Program participants played
a role in influencing other employers to implement good safety and
health practices. A key component of VPP is outreach to other firms,
and representatives at all three VPP sites we visited spoke of
mentoring to others in their industries. For example, one site hosted a
VPP Day to encourage others within its industry to participate in the
program. Interestingly, one of the VPP sites we visited had been
encouraged by other VPP sites to participate in the program.
Participants in the Strategic Partnership Program and SHARP sites we
visited also reached out to others within their industry, informing
them of the value of good safety and health practices and encouraging
their participation in OSHA's voluntary compliance programs. Some
specialists with whom we spoke commented on the value of this aspect of
the programs, although one noted that the mentoring focus should be on
improving employers' safety and health practices, not on helping
employers complete the program application paperwork.
Employers participating in these programs also sometimes influenced
other employers' practices by requiring them to meet certain standards
if they were working on the participating company's premises or to
qualify as one of the company's subcontractors. In some cases, they
also reported that other companies sought them out as suppliers and
contractors because of their good safety records. OSHA officials also
noted that participation in voluntary compliance programs could
influence those companies' suppliers and contractors to improve their
safety. For example, they told us that many construction contractors
now require their subcontractors to have insurance rates below a
certain level--rates that are based on their injury and illness rates.
Improved Safety and Health for Small Employers:
Several participants and specialists reported that the State
Consultation Program, Alliance Program, and OSHA's outreach and
training help inform small employers--who typically have less in-house
expertise to address safety and health issues--about how to make safety
and health improvements. The State Consultation Program, which is
designed to provide guidance on specific problems or, more generally,
employers' health and safety management programs, is targeted to small
employers. The three sites we visited that utilized this program had
initially sought consultations because they needed expert advice on
safety and health practices that was not available from their own
staff. According to several specialists, the Alliance Program also
connects with small businesses by working through the trade
associations that they participate in, because the associations build
on already existing relationships. In addition, the OSHA regional
offices we visited had used several outreach approaches to reach out to
small employers, for example, a free forum where small contractors
could learn the proper use of cranes and scaffolding. Similarly, one of
OSHA's area offices provided employers training courses at the local
Small Business Development Center on OSHA's requirements--including its
record-keeping requirements--and how good safety and health practices
can save them money. Regional offices have also developed newsletters
for employers in specific industries, such as a letter and accompanying
compact disc on electrical hazards provided by one office to electrical
contractors.
Although we saw evidence of OSHA's efforts to reach more small
businesses, several specialists said OSHA should include more small
businesses in voluntary compliance program activity. A representative
from a national employers association commented that smaller employers
fear OSHA because they do not know what to expect when the agency goes
into a business, even if for compliance assistance activities. Several
specialists with whom we spoke noted that smaller businesses might not
be aware of the voluntary compliance programs that are available. A
representative from an insurance company who addresses risk management
regularly commented that smaller worksites, particularly those that
change locations frequently such as sites in the construction and
roofing industries, are more likely to have safety problems.
Because OSHA Has Just Begun to Collect and Analyze Data on Its
Voluntary Compliance Programs, Their Effectiveness Cannot Be Fully
Assessed:
OSHA currently lacks the data needed to fully assess the effectiveness
of its voluntary compliance programs. Developing outcome measures is
difficult, particularly when factors other than program participation
can affect key indicators such as injury and illness rates. However,
agencies are required to develop such measures and it is especially
important for OSHA, given its limited resources, to be able to evaluate
the effectiveness of these programs.[Footnote 27] Currently, OSHA does
not collect complete, comparable data needed to measure the value of
its programs, including their relative impact, resource use, and effect
on the agency's mission. In OSHA's current strategic management plan,
one of the agency's three goals includes increasing the number of
participants in voluntary compliance programs and improving the
programs' effectiveness. Another goal includes improving the agency's
access to accurate, timely data, and enhancing its measures for
assessing the effectiveness of its programs. However, OSHA has not yet
developed a comprehensive strategic framework that articulates how the
programs fit together in accomplishing the agency's goals or how its
resources should be allocated among the various programs. While OSHA or
its state representatives ensure that voluntary program participants
are complying with the programs' requirements, and often obtains some
information on program effectiveness, such as data on injuries and
illness, it does not assess the overall impact of the programs on
worksites' safety and health.
Currently, OSHA's assessments of each program are at a different stage
of development and the approaches vary:
* VPP--Presently, OSHA's analysis of the program is limited to
reviewing VPP sites' annual injury and illness rates in the years
immediately before they are approved for the program. However, because
worksites often make safety and health improvements over a longer
period in anticipation of their participation in the program but before
they are approved, the rates OSHA reviews may not reflect changes in
injury and illness rates from improvements made as a result of their
participation. To assess the impact of VPP, OSHA contracted with a
private firm in October 2003 to conduct an evaluation of the changes in
participating employers' injury and illness rates resulting from the
program. The evaluation, to be completed in September 2004, will
evaluate the impact of VPP from the point at which employers decide to
apply for VPP until they are designated a VPP site. It will also
determine the impact of VPP on other worksites through participating
employers' outreach and mentoring efforts and provide data on dollars
spent by VPP sites on safety and health programs and cost savings from
reduced workers' compensation costs. However, because VPP does not
require applicants to provide data on their injury and illness rates
for the years prior to participation, OSHA will still be unable to
systematically assess whether improvements in their injury and illness
rates resulted from program participation.
* State Consultation Program--OSHA has been assessing possible
approaches for obtaining data on these programs, but it has been
difficult because of the confidentiality that state programs provide to
program participants. In an October 2001 report on the program, we
suggested that OSHA collect additional data to use in evaluating its
impact.[Footnote 28] In 2002, an OSHA-sponsored evaluation of the
program concluded that the program resulted in some positive outcomes,
including that participating worksites (1) were cited for fewer serious
violations if inspected by OSHA within 2 years of the consultation
visit and (2) had larger average declines in lost workday injury and
illness rates than other worksites.[Footnote 29] The report, however,
noted that factors other than the consultation program might have
contributed to these positive outcomes and that further analysis,
particularly the long-term effects of the program, would require the
collection of more data. OSHA attempted to collect such information
through a data initiative it uses to obtain information on the impact
of its enforcement efforts.[Footnote 30] However, in 2002, the Office
of Management and Budget denied OSHA permission to extend this data
collection effort to collect data from all employers, including those
with less than 40 employees. These employers represent a significant
portion of the employers that participate in the State Consultation
Program, but are not presently addressed in the data initiative.
* Strategic Partnership Program--Currently, OSHA requires program
participants to file annual evaluation reports. However, according to
an OSHA-requested study of reports submitted through September 30,
2002, the agency did not collect consistent information from
partnerships or use common performance measures.[Footnote 31] For
example, some partnerships did not submit evaluation reports, while
others provided incomplete or inconsistent information because OSHA
allowed participants to select the types of data reported. Similarly,
the U. S. Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General, which also
assessed the program, reported in September 2002 that there was
insufficient information on five of the nine partnerships it analyzed
to evaluate their impact.[Footnote 32] For example, one partnership
only provided data on injuries and illnesses for 25 of its 222
participants. In response to these studies, OSHA officials said that
they were obtaining comments on a revised format for these reports that
would include common data elements for all partnerships and that OSHA
would then be able to establish a new database designed to track
consistent measures across partnerships. The revised format for the
partnership reports will be available in Spring 2004, according to an
OSHA official.
* Alliance Program--Goals for each alliance are individually developed
and are often not readily measurable. Currently, OSHA monitors goals
and accomplishments of individual alliances by participating in
quarterly meetings and preparing annual evaluations. OSHA officials
told us that OSHA has not yet developed an evaluation approach for the
national program. Several individual Alliance Program representatives
from alliances established in 2002 told us that they have not
established a system for assessing the impact of their alliances, and
some commented that this would be difficult, given the nature of their
goals. For example, one alliance's goals are to provide information and
guidance to help protect employees' safety and health--particularly
from hazards likely to result in amputations and ergonomic hazards--and
to provide training to employers to help identify and correct these
hazards. While the alliance has provided information to employers and
workers on its Web sites, and has developed and provided training, it
is difficult to determine the impact of the alliance since companies
also implement safety and health improvements on their own.
Researchers and Other Specialists Suggested a Variety of Additional
Voluntary Compliance Strategies:
Researchers, safety and health practitioners, and other specialists we
interviewed suggested a variety of additional strategies for voluntary
compliance, some of which might require legislative changes.[Footnote
33] Some strategies might help OSHA leverage its existing resources and
others suggest the need for additional resources. The strategies that
researchers and specialists proposed generally fell into four
categories: (1) providing more incentives to encourage additional
employers to voluntarily improve safety and health in the workplace;
(2) promote more systematic approaches to workplace safety and health;
(3) focusing more specifically on high-hazard, high-injury workplaces;
and (4) using third-party approaches to achieve voluntary compliance.
While these strategies could be potentially useful and effective,
according to specialists, they could also entail the need for
safeguards, oversight, and enforcement. (See table 2.):
Table 2: Additional Voluntary Compliance Strategies:
Strategy suggested: I. Provide more incentives for employers to make
safety and health improvements;
* Develop and publicize industry-based information on the financial
benefits of improving workplace safety and health;
* Encourage state workers' compensation programs and private insurers
to consider participation in voluntary compliance programs when
calculating premiums;
* Offer tax credits or other incentives to employers for making capital
and other improvements to safety and health;
* Publish injury and illness rates for worksites with poor safety and
health records.
Strategy suggested: II. Promote more systematic approaches to workplace
safety and health;
* Encourage employers participating in voluntary programs to influence
their contractors and suppliers to make safety and health improvements;
* Require certain employers to have safety and health management
programs;
* Require employers to have an employee-management safety committee.
Strategy suggested: III. Focus more on high-hazard, high-injury
workplaces;
* Focus voluntary efforts on high-hazard, high-injury workplaces;
* Allow employers with high injury and illness rates to choose between
likely inspection and cooperative approaches.
Strategy suggested: IV. Use third-party approaches to achieve voluntary
compliance;
* Support the development of a voluntary national or international
standard for workplace safety and health;
* Allow employers to use private consultants certified by OSHA to
conduct worksite safety and health evaluations, in return for
incentives such as a limited exemption from future inspections or
reduced civil penalties.
Source: GAO analysis of suggestions made by academic researchers,
safety and health practitioners, and other specialists.
[End of table]
Provide More Incentives for Employers to Make Safety and Health
Improvements:
Specific suggestions for additional financial incentives included (1)
providing information to employers on the possible financial and other
benefits of improving safety and health, (2) encouraging the use of
workers' compensation incentives for employers that participate in
OSHA's voluntary compliance programs, and (3) creating tax incentives
for improvements. Another suggestion was to deter employers from
continuing poor safety and health practices by publishing injury and
illness rates for such worksites.
* Develop and Publicize Information on Financial Benefits--To counter
employer assumptions that safety and health improvements would
necessarily be costly, some specialists called for the agency to
develop and publicize more industry-specific data about the financial
and other benefits possible by investing in safety and health
improvements. OSHA provides general information about the direct and
indirect costs of injuries and illnesses on its Web site and is working
to develop more industry data through its alliances and other voluntary
programs.[Footnote 34] As useful as industry-specific information might
be, especially to small employers, such proprietary data are difficult
to obtain and expensive to develop, according to specialists.
Developing this information might also be a better role for industry
than for government. In addition, improving safety and health could
cost employers more money, not less.
* Encourage Workers' Compensation Incentives--OSHA could encourage
state programs and private insurers to consider employers'
participation in voluntary compliance programs when they calculate
premiums for employers.[Footnote 35] Such incentives could include, for
example, reductions in employers' insurance premiums or credits for
participation. For many employers, the possibility of achieving lower
insurance premiums could be a significant motivator for improving
workplace safety and health. However, because each state has its own
laws governing workers' compensation programs, it could prove
challenging to create such financial incentives.[Footnote 36]
Furthermore, although some insurers offer rate reductions to employers
that participate in OSHA's voluntary compliance programs, according to
OSHA officials, the agency's other attempts to work with insurers have
not succeeded because they did not want to have clients perceive them
as an agent of OSHA.[Footnote 37] Figure 10 describes the relationship
between workers' compensation and occupational safety and health
programs in two states.
Figure 10: Links between Occupational Safety and Health and Workers'
Compensation Programs in Oregon and California:
Some state-plan states, such as Oregon and California, have close links
between their workers' compensation programs and the state's
occupational safety and health program, especially in the sharing of
data. In both states, the occupational safety and health program is
under the same department as the workers' compensation program. In
Oregon, the two programs also share the same data system, which allows
the state to access workers' compensation claims data and to focus the
state's inspection and consultation resources on hazardous industries
and workplaces. In California, the occupational safety and health
division similarly uses workers' compensation data to encourage
employers with high accident and illness rates to seek consultations.
To fund these targeted consultations, California also passed a special
assessment on its workers' compensation program for such employers,
with sliding fees based on the size of their payroll.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of figure]
* Offer Tax Incentives for Capital and Other Improvements--Tax
incentives, which would require changes in the tax code, may be
especially useful for helping small employers who might lack resources
make safety and health improvements. Having a tax incentive also
signals to businesses that the government values such investments in
safety and health. However, distinguishing business purposes from
safety and health purposes can be difficult with tax incentives. Tax
incentives could also tend to favor capital-intensive solutions to
safety and health problems--such as the purchase of equipment--rather
than behavioral or systematic solutions. They may also subsidize
improvements that employers might have made in any case. Finally, in
addition to the potential for manipulation, using tax incentives could
entail lost tax revenues, without OSHA knowing their impact on safety
and health.
* Publish Injury and Illness Rates for Employers' Worksites--Gathering
and publishing the injury and illness rates for employers' worksites
could build on market incentives to pressure employers to change their
practices.[Footnote 38] For example, a subcontractor might find it
difficult to obtain a contract because of liability concerns if it were
known that the company had a high rate of workplace injuries. Right
now, OSHA publishes the names of about 3,200 worksites identified
through its site-specific targeting program as having high rates of
injuries and illnesses, but it does not publish the actual rates for
these worksites. However, there are several potential problems with
this approach. First, injury and illness rates for one particular year
may not accurately capture the performance of employers, especially
small employers.[Footnote 39] Second, businesses would likely oppose
the publication of these data because they view worksite injury and
illness rates as confidential business information that, if published,
could allow business competitors to glean information about the
company's productivity. In fact, OSHA took this position when it
denied, in July 2003, a Freedom of Information Act appeal that sought
to obtain rates for specific worksites: OSHA relied on an exemption
protecting trade secrets and commercial or financial information and
refused to disclose the information unless the parties in question
approved.[Footnote 40] Finally, publicizing injury and illness data
might also pressure employers to underreport injuries and illnesses,
creating the need for further policies or legislation requiring full
and accurate reporting and recording.
Promote More Systematic Approaches to Workplace Safety and Health:
Specific suggestions from researchers and specialists included (1)
encouraging employers that participate in OSHA's voluntary programs to
influence their contractors and suppliers to make safety and health
improvements, (2) requiring certain employers to have a safety and
health management program, and (3) requiring employers to have an
employee-management safety and health committee.
* Encourage Employers to Influence Contractors and Suppliers--To
"influence the supply chain," OSHA could encourage employers
participating in its voluntary programs to consider suppliers and
contractors' safety and health records before making contracting
decisions and encourage their suppliers and contractors to have a
safety and health program. OSHA currently requires this approach of
employers participating in VPP.[Footnote 41] Because employers are
increasingly using contractors and temporary workers, focusing
employers' attention on contractors' and suppliers' safety and health
records was considered a useful way to achieve some leverage in a
changing economy.[Footnote 42] Safety and health problems at
contractors and suppliers could also entail potential costs for
employers or could also indicate other forms of poor management, such
as poor product quality. As an example of the effectiveness of this
approach, one automaker grouped its suppliers into three tiers
according to their safety and health records, and then each tier of
suppliers pressured the lower tier to improve, according to a
specialist we interviewed. However, the degree of an employer's
potential influence over suppliers and contractors could vary by
employer size as well by industry. For example, a Fortune 500 employer
could have far more influence on its supply chain than a small body
shop, and the construction industry, which relies on numerous
subcontractors working under a general contractor, may be better able
to influence subcontractors than other industries. Implementing this
approach may be difficult because suppliers and contractors may be
unwilling to share their safety and health records or plans and
employers would need staff to conduct such reviews of its suppliers and
contractors. It may be similarly difficult for OSHA to monitor and
verify this process through employers participating in its voluntary
programs.[Footnote 43]
* Require Certain Employers to Have Safety and Health Management
Programs--As discussed in a previous GAO report and testimony,[Footnote
44] OSHA could require certain employers--such as those with high
injury and illness rates--to have safety and health management
programs.[Footnote 45] The establishment of safety and health programs,
including elements such as hazard prevention and control, is currently
required for participants in the VPP, Strategic Partnership, and SHARP
programs.[Footnote 46] Extending this approach to other employers could
help prevent additional injuries and illnesses. It could also help
employers respond more flexibly to advances in technology and other
workplace issues than with specific standards. On the other hand, it
could be difficult for OSHA to enforce employers' use of safety and
health programs, and small and mid-size employers may not have the
information or tools to implement these programs without assistance. In
our earlier testimony, we noted that reservations about these programs
stem primarily from concern about implementation issues, rather than
about their value.[Footnote 47]
Require Employee-Management Safety Committees--OSHA could issue a
regulation requiring employers to have an employee-management safety
committee at every worksite to investigate accidents, settle disputes,
and provide information to management.[Footnote 48] The VPP does not
require employers to have such a committee at every worksite, but does
consider it one way to achieve employee involvement.[Footnote 49] If
required for all employers, such committees might raise additional
issues, including the determination of who would represent
workers.[Footnote 50]
Focus More on High-Hazard, High-Injury Workplaces:
Specific suggestions for focusing more on high-hazard, high-injury
workplaces included targeting employers with the highest levels of
injury and illness for voluntary programs and having such employers
choose between likely inspection and cooperative approaches with the
agency.
* Target Employers with Highest Levels of Injury and Illness--OSHA
could classify employers according to their level of injury and illness
and focus the agency's voluntary compliance efforts on those with the
highest rates. While this suggestion was seen as a way for OSHA to best
use its limited resources, according to specialists, it might also
entail additional costs for data development.
* Allow Employers to Choose between Likely Inspection and Cooperative
Approaches--Another suggestion was for OSHA to pursue a previously
attempted strategy targeting employers with the highest rates of injury
and illness.[Footnote 51] The agency informed these employers that they
had been placed on a primary inspection list, but that they could
reduce the likelihood of inspection if they chose to work cooperatively
with the agency by fulfilling certain requirements.[Footnote 52] Now,
when OSHA informs selected employers that they have among the highest
injury and illness rates in the country, the agency refers employers to
outside consultants, insurance carriers, and state workers'
compensation offices for advice on improving safety and health;
employers with fewer than 250 employees are also referred to the State
Consultation Program.[Footnote 53]
Use Third-Party Approaches:
Specific suggestions for third-party approaches included (1) supporting
the development of a voluntary national or international standard for
workplace safety and health and (2) using private consultants to
conduct safety and health evaluations of worksites.
* Support Development of a Voluntary National or International Standard
for Workplace Safety and Health--Having a voluntary national or
international standard could help strengthen the infrastructure for
workplace safety and health and could build on some employers' desire
for a widely recognized credential that could be useful to them in
competing with other companies, especially in global markets. For
example, employers can seek certification from independent
organizations for achieving International Organization for
Standardization standards.[Footnote 54] To a certain extent, OSHA is
currently playing a role in the development of a voluntary standard,
according to OSHA, since some OSHA staff members are assisting a
national standards committee that is working on a safety and health
standard. In addition, many industry associations are involved on this
committee, OSHA staff noted. Limitations of this approach are that: (1)
such standards are not mandatory, but serve more as flexible guidance,
because they reflect agreements reached by committees; (2) although
large employers competing in the international marketplace tend to seek
out international standards credentials, these are not necessarily the
employers needing OSHA's attention; and (3) it can be difficult to set
voluntary standards because organizations need to invest resources and
provide appropriate expertise.
* Use Private Consultants to Conduct Safety and Health Evaluations--
This suggestion would entail allowing employers to voluntarily use
private consultants to conduct worksite safety and health evaluations
and certify worksites, in return for incentives, such as a limited
exemption from future inspections or reduced civil penalties.[Footnote
55] Using third-party, private-sector consultants to certify workplace
safety and health was also proposed in the late 1990s as an amendment
to the OSH Act--known as the SAFE Act.[Footnote 56] Using consultants
could leverage existing OSHA resources by helping workplaces that might
never otherwise see an OSHA inspector, especially small employers, and
possibly also by enabling employers to address additional safety and
health issues that might not be covered under an OSHA inspection for
compliance with standards. At the same time, using consultants also
raises various implementation, oversight, and legal issues described
below.
(a) Implementation--A key issue is that consultants' independence may
be compromised if employers paid consultants directly for conducting
audits and certifying employers.[Footnote 57] Employers might also need
more than one consultant to conduct a comprehensive review of both
safety and health issues. Finally, the use of consultants would set the
federal program in competition with the State Consultation Program,
according to OSHA officials.
(b) Oversight--One issue is what kind of oversight is possible when
employers will not--or cannot--make improvements that consultants
recommend. Another is that differences in consultants' focus would
create inconsistencies in the certification process, since a workplace
evaluation could focus on compliance with OSHA standards or on the
broader safety and health environment, as under OSHA's VPP,
Partnership, and SHARP programs.
(c) Legality--Finally, constitutional issues have been raised as to
whether OSHA can use private consultants, as envisioned by the SAFE
Act, to conduct safety and health evaluations of employers' worksites
and to issue certificates of compliance, exempting employers from civil
penalties for a limited period of time. For example, when Congress was
considering the SAFE Act, the Justice Department argued that the act
might be unconstitutional because, among other things, it delegated
executive functions to private entities without providing adequate
supervision or accountability for their activities. The Senate
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, which had
jurisdiction over the legislation, disagreed with Justice's arguments,
asserting that they reflected a misunderstanding of the proposed role
and authority of third-party consultants.[Footnote 58]
Conclusions:
By many accounts, OSHA's voluntary compliance strategies have improved
employers' safety and health practices by allowing the agency to play a
collaborative, rather than a policing, role with employers. The
testimony and enthusiasm of participants suggests that OSHA's voluntary
compliance programs have considerable value. The agency has begun to
develop performance measures and collect data on some program outcomes,
as well as undertake efforts to evaluate its programs, such as
contracting for a VPP evaluation and revising the performance
evaluation format for the Partnership program. However, because OSHA
does not yet have comprehensive data on its voluntary compliance
programs, the agency cannot fully assess the effectiveness of any
single program or compare the relative effectiveness of the programs.
OSHA should position itself to know, for example, the relative
effectiveness of programs that focus on employers predisposed to
following good safety and health practices as compared to those that
attempt to reach employers and industries with poor safety and health
records. Without such information, the agency is also limited in its
ability to make sound decisions about how to best allocate its
resources among individual programs, or between voluntary compliance
programs and its other activities, particularly enforcement.
After several years of experimentation and growth, this is an opportune
time for OSHA to determine how to best target its voluntary compliance
efforts. Having a mix of strategies appears useful in reaching
different types of employers and industries. At the same time, having
such a mix may unduly tax the agency's resources unless it is
accompanied by a comprehensive, strategic framework that establishes
priorities and defines how these strategies fit together to accomplish
the overall goals of the agency. Absent such a strategic framework,
OSHA cannot ensure that it is making the best use of its resources to
improve workplace safety and health. Furthermore, the agency must
balance its plans to expand its voluntary compliance programs with its
enforcement responsibilities. Given OSHA's current resources, it is
unclear how it can undertake much expansion without a careful
assessment of the impact on its resources and other programs. Unless it
has such an assessment, OSHA runs the risk of compromising the quality
of its voluntary compliance programs.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
In order to strengthen OSHA's voluntary compliance strategies, the
Secretary of Labor should direct the Assistant Secretary for
Occupational Safety and Health to:
* identify cost-effective methods of collecting complete, comparable
data on program outcomes for the VPP and Partnership programs to use in
assessing their effectiveness, and continue to search for cost-
effective approaches that will enable the agency to assess the
effectiveness of the State Consultation and Alliance programs, and:
* develop a strategic framework that articulates the purposes and
distinctions of the different voluntary compliance programs, sets
priorities among these programs, and identifies how the agency's
resources should be allocated among these programs, before further
expanding them.
Agency Comments:
We provided a draft of this report to OSHA for comment. OSHA's formal
comments and our responses are contained in appendix I. In addition to
its written comments, OSHA provided us with technical comments, which
we incorporated as appropriate.
OSHA generally agreed with our findings, conclusions, and
recommendations. The agency asserted, however, that we had based our
recommendations on a small sample of worksites and that our methodology
for selecting researchers and specialists was not scientific and was
subject to biases. We did not base our recommendations on site-specific
findings or on interviews with researchers and specialists, but rather
on programwide data. More specifically, our recommendations were based
on our analyses of OSHA's program requirements and program data as well
as the findings and conclusions reported in the OSHA-sponsored and
Inspector General evaluations of these programs that were cited in our
report. Although our selection of researchers and specialists was, by
necessity, judgmental, we sought to obtain a broad, balanced range of
perspectives and expertise about the programs' effectiveness.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days
after its issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report
to the Secretary of Labor and the Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health and other interested parties. We will
also make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the
report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at http://
www.gao.gov.
Please contact me or Revae Moran on (202) 512-7215 if you or your staff
have any questions about this report. Other contacts and staff
acknowledgments are listed in appendix II.
Sincerely yours,
Signed by:
Robert E. Robertson:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration:
U.S. Department of Labor:
March 8, 2004:
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Washington, D.C.20210:
Mr. Robert E. Robertson:
Director, Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues:
United States General Accounting Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 5930
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Robertson:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the General Accounting
Office's (GAO) report on workplace safety and health, entitled "OSHA's
Voluntary Compliance Strategies Show Promising Results But Should Be
Fully Evaluated Before They Are Expanded.":
The Department of Labor is pleased that GAO recognizes the value of
voluntary programs to reduce workplace illnesses and injuries, and
recognizes that because enforcement programs alone can only reach a
fraction of the nations workplaces, it is important to use voluntary
compliance strategies to complement enforcement efforts. The Department
would like to note that these complementary voluntary efforts do not
come at the expense of enforcement efforts. Even though GAO points out
that the percentage of OSHA's budget devoted to enforcement has
decreased in recent years, and the percentage devoted to voluntary
programs has increased, GAO fails to mention that enforcement efforts,
as measured by inspections, remained steady or increased slightly, each
year.
In general, the Department agrees with GAO's recommendations to use
cost-effective methods to assess the effectiveness of voluntary
programs and to incorporate these results into a strategic framework.
On pages two and three, GAO points out that OSHA does use a variety of
strategies to reach different types of employers. These complementary
strategies attempt to reach different types of industries, employers,
and workers, making it difficult and costly to compare their relative
effects, as GAO suggests. Additionally, even if it were possible to
make such comparisons, the Agency would not necessarily re-prioritize
any resources based on such comparisons, since the programs were
designed with differing outcomes in mind.
Even so, OSHA has started to review its operating plan for Fiscal Year
2004 with an eye towards including evaluation results in its Fiscal
Year 2005 Strategic Management Plan.
OSHA is now using the results of past evaluation studies of its
voluntary programs to serve as a foundation to strengthen its strategic
planning process. Specifically, in September 2003, OSHA initiated a
study to measure the impact of its Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP).
Those results will be available within the next several months, and
will also be used in determining what changes will be made to its
Strategic Management Plan. Likewise, two studies have already been
completed (one by OSHA and one by the Department of Labor's Inspector
General) to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategic partnership
efforts, and OSHA has already begun to make program changes based on
the results of those reviews. GAO also did a separate study on
consultation programs in 2001, with study results that provide insights
into the value of that program and recommendations that OSHA has
already begun to implement.
The Agency expects to continue evaluation studies and improve the
methodologies used to be more fully aware of the contributions of
voluntary programs to overall safety and health.
In closing, while we agree with the conclusion that additional
evaluation efforts are desirable, it is important to point out that GAO
based its recommendations on an extremely small sample of workplace
visits and interviews. For example, the footnote on page 24 indicates
GAO visited only three VPP sites (out of a total of over 1,000 sites),
three firms who received at least one consultation from a population of
tens of thousands of firms that have been assisted by the consultation
program, and three employers in the partnership programs drawn from
over 200 partnerships, many of which represent multiple firms. While
GAO did supplement these visits with interviews from academia, worker
focus groups, practioners of workplace safety and health, and union
representatives, the methodology for singling out these groups was not
scientific and was subject to biases. The study results, therefore,
should not be viewed as a definitive assessment of the overall
effectiveness of OSHA's voluntary programs.
Nevertheless, the Department appreciates GAO's report and remains
committed to improve data-collection methods to allow for better future
evaluations and to incorporate these improvements into the overall
strategic planning process.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
John L. Henshaw:
Note: GAO comments supplementing those in the report text appear at the
end of this appendix.
GAO Comments:
1. We added information on page 20 to show that OSHA's enforcement
efforts, as measured by the number of inspections, have remained
constant or increased slightly each year from 1996 to 2003.
2. We did not base our recommendations on site-specific findings or on
interviews with researchers and specialists, but rather on programwide
data.
[End of section]
Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Revae E. Moran, (202) 512-3863 Deborah A. Signer, (202) 512-7158:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Carol L. Patey and Christine A. Houle made significant contributions to
this report in all aspects of the work and Leslie C. Ross assisted
during the information-gathering segment of the assignment. In
addition, Susan C. Bernstein, Julian P. Klazkin, Lynn M. Musser, and
Walter K. Vance provided key technical and legal assistance.
FOOTNOTES
[1] The State Consultation and the Strategic Partnership programs are
sometimes referred to by slightly different names. The State
Consultation Program is also known as the Onsite Consultation Program
and the Consultation Program and the Strategic Partnership Program is
also known as OSHA Strategic Partnerships for Worker Safety and Health.
[2] States that are granted authority for their own enforcement are
referred to as "state-plan states." Under the OSH Act, "state" is
defined to include the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands. See 29 U.S.C. §652(7).
[3] OSHA established guidelines for voluntary safety and health
programs in 1989.
[4] The VPP and Strategic Partnership programs discussed in this report
primarily apply to states directly under OSHA authority, known as
federal OSHA states. These programs have also been implemented in some
state-plan states, although their requirements may vary from those in
federal OSHA states. In state-plan states, program safety and health
standards, and the enforcement of such standards, must be at least as
effective as federal OSHA programs. See 29 U.S.C. §667(C)(2).
[5] The State Consultation Program defines a small business as one with
fewer than 250 workers at the workplace where the consultation is
conducted and no more than 500 workers companywide.
[6] Program data for the State Consultation Programs in this report
refer to the states operating State Consultation Programs under section
21(d) of the OSH Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 670(d)). These include 48
states, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Marianas, and the
Virgin Islands. Kentucky, Washington, and Puerto Rico operate
consultation programs under other authority.
[7] Consultation visits are not kept confidential in situations where
imminent danger or serious hazards are not corrected as agreed upon or
where the employer participates in state's inspection deferral or
recognition and exemption program.
[8] Each state operating a State Consultation Program under section
21(d) of the OSH Act must operate a recognition and exemption program,
but programs operating in state-plan states may use program names other
than SHARP.
[9] As of February 29, 2004, the number of VPP worksites in both
federal OSHA and state-plan states had increased to 1,053 worksites.
[10] VPP programs in state-plan states are not required to have the
same requirements as the federal VPP.
[11] This percentage refers only to VPP worksites in federal OSHA
states. The remaining 8 percent of VPP sites are designated as Merit (7
percent) or Demonstration (1 percent). Merit worksites have not
achieved all the necessary requirements for Star by the time of the on-
site review, but have demonstrated the potential and willingness to
achieve the Star designation. Demonstration worksites are worksites
with safety and health programs that meet VPP Star requirements, but
they test alternative ways to achieve safety and health excellence that
may differ from these requirements. Demonstration worksites may lead to
changes in VPP Star criteria.
[12] OSHA plans to pilot both the VPP Challenge and VPP Corporate
programs for at least 1 year before formally implementing them. The VPP
Construction program is expected to be implemented in fiscal year 2005,
according to an OSHA official.
[13] As of February 29, 2004, the number of partnerships had increased
to 215.
[14] A trade association is an organization made up of individuals and
employers in the same industry (e.g., construction, textiles,
shipbuilding), whereas a professional association is made up of a
number of practitioners employed in a given profession (e.g., safety
engineers, industrial hygienists). Educational institutions,
businesses, labor organizations, and government agencies may also join
the Alliance Program.
[15] As of February 29, 2004, there were a total of 167 alliances--53
national alliances and 114 regional. Of the 53 national alliances, 60
percent were with trade organizations, 20 percent with professional
organizations, and 20 percent with other organizations, including
individual employers and academic institutions, according to agency
officials.
[16] These grants, titled the Susan Harwood Training Grant Program,
provide funds on a competitive basis to nonprofit organizations to
educate workers and employers in small businesses and provide training
on new OSHA standards and on hazards identified in OSHA's Strategic
Management Plan or in special emphasis programs.
[17] These centers, funded partially by the U.S. Small Business
Administration, are located throughout the country and provide
counseling, training, and technical assistance to assist current or
potential small businesses.
[18] According to OSHA officials, the agency's budget for the State
Consultation Program limits the extent to which it can expand the
number of consultation visits conducted.
[19] The number of students trained by OSHA has increased in the same
time period, with the number of students trained more than doubling
from 1993 to 2003.
[20] These goals represent increases in federal OSHA states; state-plan
states are not included in these estimates because they do not follow
OSHA's Strategic Plan.
[21] This goal represents new VPP sites in both federal OSHA and state-
plan states. OSHA also plans to increase the number of people trained
in outreach and training programs by 10 percent per year.
[22] Of the $254 million devoted to enforcement activities, $91 million
was given to state-plan states to administer their safety and health
programs. These states use a portion of these funds to carry out
compliance assistance activities. In addition, some resources that are
devoted to other programs, such as technical support, are used for
compliance assistance activities.
[23] Although OSHA changed the way in which it accounts for its
budgetary resources in fiscal year 1997, we obtained actual budget
values for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 from the Budget of the U.S.
Government for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, respectively, which took
into account these changes.
[24] While the average yearly growth in the funds budgeted for OSHA's
enforcement activities from 1996 to 2003 was about 2.5 percent, the
average yearly growth in funds for voluntary compliance strategies for
the same period was over 9 percent.
[25] We visited employers participating in OSHA's voluntary programs in
Georgia, Illinois, and Massachusetts. In each state, we visited three
employers--one that participated in the VPP, one in the State
Consultation Program, and one in the Strategic Partnership Program. At
each of these employers, we interviewed management officials and
members of the safety committee, and we also conducted a focus group of
employees not directly involved with safety and health issues. The nine
employers we visited were from the manufacturing, construction (both
roofing and steel erection), transportation (aircraft maintenance),
healthcare (nursing home), and food (meatpacking) industries. The
number of employees at the worksites ranged from about 30 employees to
almost 3,000 employees.
[26] The reduction in workers' compensation premiums is closely linked
to the reduction in injury and illness rates, since these costs are
based on employers' injury and illness rates.
[27] Since the enactment of the Government Performance and Results Act
of 1993, federal agencies have been increasingly required to focus on
achieving results and to demonstrate how their activities help achieve
agency goals.
[28] U.S. General Accounting Office, Workplace Safety and Health: OSHA
Should Strengthen the Management of Its Consultation Program, GAO-02-60
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 12, 2001).
[29] John Mendeloff, Ph.D, and Wayne Gray, Ph.D, Evaluation of the OSHA
Consultation Program, report prepared for the OSHA Office of Program
Evaluation and Audits (Lexington, Mass.: July 2002).
[30] OSHA collects occupational illness and injury information through
the OSHA Data Initiative from employers within specific industries and
size categories. The information is used to identify and target agency
interventions to those employers who have serious workplace problems.
[31] TATC Consulting, Evaluation of the OSHA Strategic Partnership
Program, (Prepared for the Office of Partnerships & Recognition,
Directorate of Cooperative and State Programs, OSHA) (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 14, 2003).
[32] U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General, Performance
Audit of Strategic Partnership Program, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, for the Period January 1, 1995 through February 28,
2002, Report No. 05-02-007-10-001. (Washington, D.C.: September 2002).
[33] To obtain additional suggestions for voluntary compliance, we drew
upon the expertise of a range of people knowledgeable about
occupational safety and health issues, seeking a balance of
perspectives. These included academic researchers who had conducted
studies for or about OSHA; practitioners from safety and health
professional associations; current and former state-plan state
administrators of occupational safety and health programs; specialists
representing employer organizations; and union representatives
representing employee perspectives. In selecting those we interviewed
for these discussions, we examined literature from the field and
considered those who had conducted evaluations or published research on
OSHA programs or who had participated in GAO expert panels on worker
protection and workforce issues.
[34] For example, see http://www.osha.gov.Publications/JSHQ/
fall2002html/safety_health.htm and http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/
smallbusiness/safetypays.html.
[35] Workers' Compensation laws are designed to ensure that employees
who are injured or disabled on the job are provided with fixed monetary
awards, eliminating the need for litigation. Workers are generally
protected through state statutes. Federal statutes provide protection
for federal employees and certain occupational classes.
[36] OSHA officials said that the reason for this is that the OSH Act
may not displace or affect "in any manner" any state workers'
compensation law. See 29 U.S.C. §653 (b)(4).
[37] OSHA has an alliance with one private insurer and has involved
insurers in several partnerships.
[38] One federal agency that uses such an incentive is the
Environmental Protection Agency, which publishes annually the top 10
facilities by industry that have the largest total toxic chemical
releases. The agency credits its Toxics Release Inventory--a national
database that identifies facilities; chemicals manufactured,
processed, and used at these facilities; and the annual amounts
released--with influencing industries to reduce their chemical
releases.
[39] A small number of injuries at a small employer's worksite can
increase its injury rates dramatically. For this reason, injury and
illness rates for small employers should be interpreted with caution.
[40] According to OSHA, the agency's decision was appealed to a U.S.
district court in New York in October 2003.
[41] VPP participants are required to ensure that safety and health
considerations are addressed in selecting contractors and when
contractors are onsite. In addition, they are required to encourage
contractors to develop and operate effective safety and health
management systems.
[42] Voluntary compliance may also be more likely when there is a
greater likelihood that a firm's customers will take into account its
compliance record in making purchasing decisions. See Sidney Shapiro
and Randy Rabinowitz, "Voluntary Regulatory Compliance in Theory and
Practice: The Case of OSHA," Administrative Law Review (52 Admin. L.
Rev. 97) Winter 2000, p. 13.
[43] Making it a requirement might raise a number of legal concerns,
including whether such a requirement would exceed OSHA's authority
under the OSH Act.
[44] U.S. General Accounting Office, Occupational Safety & Health:
Options for Improving Safety and Health in the Workplace, GAO/
HRD-90-66BR (Washington, D.C.: August 1990), pp. 46-48, and
Occupational Safety and Health: Worksite Safety and Health Programs
Show Promise, GAO/T-HRD-92-15 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 26, 1992).
[45] OSHA established guidelines for voluntary safety and health
programs in 1989. In 1998, OSHA drafted a proposed rule that would have
required employers, except those engaged in construction and
agriculture, to establish a safety and health management program. OSHA
withdrew the rule in August 2002.
[46] About 10 state-plan states require employers to have such
programs, according to a report on state plan activities issued August
12, 2003 by the Occupational Safety & Health State Plan Association:
California, for example, generally requires employers to set up
effective written injury and illness prevention programs.
[47] See GAO/T-HRD-92-15, p. 2.
[48] This suggestion was also discussed in a previous GAO report: See
GAO/HRD-90-66BR, pp. 48-50.
[49] Oregon makes it mandatory for most employers to have a joint
management-labor safety committee.
[50] To comply with the National Labor Relations Act, employers may not
dominate committees that are considered "labor organizations." See
Electromation, Inc., 309 N.L.R.B. 990 (1992), enforced, 35 F.3d 1148
(7th Cir. 1994).
[51] The implementation of this strategy, the Cooperative Compliance
Program, was challenged in court. The court held that the program was
not properly implemented and that the agency should have implemented it
through notice and comment rulemaking. See Chamber of Commerce v. U.S.
Department of Labor, 174 F.3d 206 (D.C. Cir.1999). The Cooperative
Compliance Program was based, in turn, on an earlier pilot called the
Maine 200 program that was carried out in the early 1990s.
[52] Requirements included identifying and correcting hazards, reducing
injuries and illnesses, implementing a safety and health program,
involving employees, and providing OSHA with annual data on injuries
and illnesses.
[53] OSHA officials noted that, following the issuance of this letter,
the State Consultation programs often report a distinct rise in the
number of requests for consultations.
[54] The International Organization for Standardization is a
nongovernmental network of national standards institutes from about 150
countries that issues voluntary standards, including standards for
environmental management. Experts on loan from industries and
businesses develop these standards with assistance from representatives
from government agencies, universities, and laboratories. Audits and
certifications of companies applying for certification are carried out
by independent certification organizations. The United States
representative to the international organization is the American
National Standards Institute, a private nonprofit organization.
[55] OSHA uses private sector consultants indirectly through its State
Consultation programs as well as Special Government Employees during
VPP evaluations. We commented on this suggestion in our 1990 report on
OSHA options, p. 35.
[56] The Safety Advancement for Employees Act of 1999, known as the
SAFE Act, was introduced in the 105th Congress as S. 1237 and in the
106th Congress as S. 385, but was never enacted. The act was designed
to encourage employers to participate in voluntary safety and health
audits using the expertise of consultants certified by OSHA.
Participants would have been exempt from civil penalties for one year
if they had been certified as compliant.
[57] One suggestion to ensure consultants' independence was to have
employers contribute to a fund that OSHA would manage and use this fund
to pay consultants. This approach creates an additional oversight
responsibility for OSHA. Because consultations are provided at no cost
to the employer under the State Consultation Program, setting up a
federal program with user fees for employers may not be feasible.
[58] See S. Rep. No. 106-202, at 25-26, 63-64 (1999).
GAO's Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street NW,
Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.
20548: