Abstract
Keywords
Improving worksite health promotion program (WHP) evaluation processes continues to be challenging because of organizational individuality, which often results in data misrepresentation (Grossmeier, 2018). WHPs are a series of incentives, programs, and policies to promote employee health and wellness (Passey et al., 2018). WHP designs vary across employers, with no standardized, one-size-fits-all approach. Design flexibility allows organizations to tailor health promotion efforts to meet the needs of employees, organizations, and customers, maximizing full economic capabilities and employee wellness (Graham, 2022). Conventionally, WHPs have comprised physical activity, nutrition, smoking cessation, and stress management, focusing primarily on physical wellness. However, WHP programs that support multiple dimensions of wellness (e.g., social, emotional, intellectual, physical, and spiritual), target organizational needs and interests, and require evaluation of both value of investment (VOI) and return on investment (ROI) benefits for both employer and employees (Grossmeier, 2018).
Approximately 73% of small organizations (3–199 employees) and 98% of large organizations (200 or more employees) offer health benefit packages that include some type of WHP (Passey et al., 2018). A shared vision of WHPs is to improve the overall health and wellbeing of employees and their families through an array of programs, education, and policies embracing aspects of health promotion and wellness while reducing healthcare and organizational costs. WHPs are successful when indispensable components of workplace health promotion are addressed: employee assistance programs, health promotion integration in organizational cultures, biometric screenings and health risk assessments with proper follow-up and treatment procedures, education, and supportive emotional and social work environments (Grossmeier, 2018).
Although the design and implementation of WHPs have been well established, there has been little focus on employees’ perspectives on program effectiveness and overall program evaluation (Graham, 2022; Grossmeier, 2018). To date, approaches for evaluations have included participation rates, absenteeism, employee turnover/retention, and healthcare coverage/costs, which are quantitative and continue to misrepresent the total WHP value (Grossmeier, 2018). A comprehensive approach employing financial metrics, quantitative approaches, and employee perspectives may provide a more robust evaluation process. An example of a comprehensive evaluation can be found at https://ways2wellness.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Evaluating-Your-Workplace-Wellness-Program-Toolkit.pdf. The Wellness Council of America, WELCOA, is a great asset for WHP design, implementation, and evaluation. WELCOA can be viewed here, https://www.welcoa.org/. Other design resources include, https://www.wellsparkhealth.com/lp/get-in-touchb/ and https://www.wellsteps.com/explore/
Comprehensive WHP program development and evaluations have direct implications for occupational safety health (OSH) professionals, such as the occupational health nurse. OSH feel valued and have a stronger sense of purpose and work dedication when the organizational goals align with WHP goals, resulting in stronger healthcare delivery and a healthier workforce. It is important for the OSH to be involved in the evaluation process. In some situations, change is hard to initiate in the work culture, so OSH involvement is a critical part of the evaluation process. In addition to their involvement in the initial evaluation, the OSH needs to lead the structured routine programmatic evaluation, using both quantitative and qualitative metrics to ensure program fidelity and that the targeted goals are being met responding to worker and employee needs.
With transforming healthcare models, from treatment to prevention, and diversifying employees and work environments, WHPs should be adaptable, challenge new barriers, apply to new work environments, and embrace multilevel, multidimensional programs. Nontraditional programming requires nontraditional evaluations! Evaluation uncertainties and discrepancies result from the lack of WHP standardization and the diverse nature of WHP development. Evaluation processes utilizing both financial and intangible metrics may provide a more expansive view of the total value of WHPs and allow WHP practitioners and occupational health professionals to implement a holistic approach to health and wellness. Development is best conducted with a personal touch, tailoring employees’ needs and interests to the WHP.
