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. 

OSHAs 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 OSHAs 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 OSHAs voluntary compliance 
programs and (2) develop a strategic framework that articulates the 
priorities and resource allocations for the agencys 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: