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 
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. 

Highlights of GAO-04-378, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Workforce 

Protections, Committee on Education and 

the Workforce, House of Representatives 

March 2004

WORKPLACE SAFETY AND HEALTH

OSHA's Voluntary Compliance Strategies 

Show Promising Results, but Should Be 

Fully Evaluated before They Are 

Expanded 

OSHA has implemented four voluntary programs, using a mix of strategies, 

that have extended its reach to a growing number of employers. For 

example, one program recognizes more than 1,000 worksites with exemplary 

records and practices while another focuses on hazardous industries, 

encouraging more than 200 employers to eliminate serious hazards. The 

agency plans to significantly expand its voluntary compliance programs over 

the next few years, although such expansion may tax its limited resources. 

OSHA’s voluntary compliance programs appear to have yielded many 

positive outcomes, but the agency does not yet have adequate data to assess 

their individual and relative effectiveness. Employers and employees at nine 

worksites we visited attested to reductions in injuries and illnesses and 

improved relationships with one another and with OSHA. However, the 

agency has just begun to evaluate its programs and much of its data are 

insufficient for evaluation. For example, data on one program are 

inconsistent, making comparisons difficult, and goals for another program 

are individually developed and not readily measurable. The lack of such data 

makes it difficult for OSHA to articulate priorities and necessary resource 

allocations. The additional strategies that researchers and specialists 

suggested generally fell into four categories: providing more incentives to 

encourage additional employers to voluntarily improve workplace safety and 

health; promoting more systematic approaches to workplace safety and 

health; focusing more specifically on high-hazard, high-injury workplaces; 

and using third-party approaches to achieve voluntary compliance. 

Growth in Voluntary Compliance Programs, 1993 to 2003 

Number of worksites, partnerships, or programs

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

0

200

400

1,200

1,000

800

600

Source: OSHA.

Worksites with exemplary safety and health programs in Voluntary Protection Programs

Small business worksites recognized by state programs for having exemplary safety and health programs 

(Data only available for states under federal OSHA authority from 1998 on)

Strategic partnership agreements addressing specific industry problems at multiple worksites

Alliance agreements primarily with trade or professional organizations to conduct training and

outreach-related activities

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. 

To strengthen OSHA’s use of its 

voluntary compliance strategies, 

GAO recommends that the 

Secretary of Labor direct the 

Assistant Secretary for 

Occupational Safety and Health to 

(1) identify cost-effective methods 

of assessing the effectiveness of 

OSHA’s voluntary compliance 

programs and (2) develop a 

strategic framework that 

articulates the priorities and 

resource allocations for the 

agency’s voluntary compliance 

programs before further expanding 

the use of these strategies. 

In its written comments on the 

draft report, OSHA generally 

agreed with our findings, 

conclusions, and 

recommendations. 
Page i GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 4

OSHA Has Employed a Variety of Voluntary Compliance Strategies, 

Which Has Extended the Agency’s Reach to a Growing Number 

of Employers 7

Voluntary Strategies Appear to Have Many Positive Outcomes, but 

the Absence of Comprehensive Data Limits Assessment 25

Researchers and Other Specialists Suggested a Variety of 

Additional Voluntary Compliance Strategies 33

Conclusions 43

Recommendations for Executive Action 43

Agency Comments 44

Appendix I Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 46 

GAO Comments 48

Appendix II GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 49 

GAO Contacts 49

Staff Acknowledgments 49

Tables 

Table 1: Summary of OSHA’s Four Voluntary Compliance Programs 8

Table 2: Additional Voluntary Compliance Strategies 34

Figures 

Figure 1: Example of a SHARP Worksite 10

Figure 2: Federal and State-Plan State VPP Worksites, by Industry 11

Figure 3: Federal VPP Worksites, by Size of Employer 12

Figure 4: Example of a VPP Worksite 13

Figure 5: Example of a Strategic Partnership 15

Figure 6: Strategic Partnership Programs in Federal OSHA States, 

by Industry or Area of Emphasis 16

Figure 7: Example of an Alliance 18

Figure 8: Growth in Voluntary Compliance Programs, 1993 to 2003 20

Contents 
Page ii GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Figure 9: Use of OSHA’s Budget for Fiscal Years 1996 to 2003, by 

Program 22

Figure 10: Links between Occupational Safety and Health and 

Workers’ Compensation Programs in Oregon and 

California 36

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 

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. However, 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. 
Page 1 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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 

United States General Accounting Office 

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP), the State Consultation Program, the 

Strategic Partnership Program, and the Alliance Program.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. 

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. 

 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. 

Results in Brief 
Page 3 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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 staterun, 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 eightfold 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 
Page 4 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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 

Background 
Page 5 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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.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 

 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. 
Page 6 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 
Page 7 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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).4

 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). 

OSHA Has Employed 

a Variety of Voluntary 

Compliance 

Strategies, Which Has 

Extended the 

Agency’s Reach to a 

Growing Number of 

Employers 

Voluntary Compliance 

Programs Are Designed to 

Reach a Range of 

Employers 
Page 8 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Table 1: Summary of OSHA’s Four Voluntary Compliance Programs 

Program/year 

established Target participants Program description OSHA oversight 

State Consultation 

Program 

1975 

Small businesses in high-hazard 

industries. 

Free, usually confidential reviews 

of employers’ worksites to identify 

hazards and abatement 

techniques. 

Program operates in all states and 

is run by state governments, but 

funded mainly by OSHA. 

Voluntary Protection 

Programs 

1982 

Single worksites typically with 

injury and illness rates below 

average for their industry sector. 

Recognizes worksites that have 

safety and health programs with 

specific features that exceed 

OSHA standards. 

Employers must pass a weeklong 

on-site worksite review by OSHA 

personnel. 

Participants complete yearly selfevaluations. 

OSHA recertifies worksites every 

1 to 5 years. 

Strategic Partnership 

Programa

1998 

Priority for participation is given 

to groups of employers and 

employees in high-hazard 

workplaces, with a focus on 

employers working at multiple 

worksites. 

Flexible agreements between 

OSHA and partners to address 

a specific safety and health 

problem. 

OSHA conducts verification 

inspections for a percentage of 

partner worksites to ensure 

compliance with the partnership 

agreement. 

Alliance Program 

2002 

Trade and professional 

organizations, employers, 

labor unions, governmental 

organizations. 

Agreements with organizations 

that focus on training, outreach, 

and promoting the consciousness 

of safety and health issues. 

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. 

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. 

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.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 

 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. 

State Consultation Program 
Page 9 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

their abatement. In fiscal year 2003, state agents conducted about 28,900 

consultation visits. 6 The names of employers receiving consultation visits 

are kept confidential and separate from OSHA enforcement officials.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.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 stateplan 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. 

 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. 
Page 10 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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.9

 The manufacturing and chemical 

industries comprise 21 percent and 20 percent of these recognized 

worksites, respectively (see fig. 2). 

 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. 

Voluntary Protection Programs 
Page 11 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Figure 2: Federal and State-plan State VPP Worksites, by Industry 

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. 

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

Percent

Source: OSHA. 

Manufacturing

Chemical

Paper pr

Wood products

oducts

Warehouse 

1

2

4 4

5 5

6

7

8

9 9

20

21

and storage

Refineries

Plastics

Food products

Utilities

Services

Construction

Textiles

Other
Page 12 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Figure 3: Federal VPP Worksites, by Size of Employer 

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.10 As of September 30, 2003, 92 percent of all VPP worksites in 

federal OSHA states have Star designation.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 

 10VPP programs in state-plan states are not required to have the same requirements as the 

federal VPP. 

11This 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. 
Page 13 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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.12

 12OSHA 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. 
Page 14 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

The Strategic Partnership Program, formalized in 1998, is designed to help 

groups of employers and employees working at multiple worksites in highhazard 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. 

Strategic Partnership Program 
Page 15 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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).13

 13As of February 29, 2004, the number of partnerships had increased to 215. 
Page 16 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Figure 6: Strategic Partnership Programs in Federal OSHA States, by Industry or 

Area of Emphasis 

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. 

The Alliance Program targets trade, professional, and other types of 

organizations to work collaboratively with OSHA to promote workplace 

safety and health issues.14 Alliances can be formed through national or 

 14A 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. 

Alliance Program 
Page 17 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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 industryspecific 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. 

 15As 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. 
Page 18 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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.16 In fiscal year 2003, OSHA funded 67 such training 

grants totaling over $11 million. 

 16These 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. 

Other Voluntary Compliance 

Efforts 
Page 19 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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. 

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.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.19 (See 

fig. 8.) 

 17These 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. 

18According 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. 

19The 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. 

Participation in Voluntary 

Compliance Has Grown in 

the Past Decade, and 

OSHA Plans Dramatic 

Increases 
Page 20 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Figure 8: Growth in Voluntary Compliance Programs, 1993 to 2003 

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. 

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.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 worksites.21

 20These 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. 

21This 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. 

Number of worksites, partnerships, or programs

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

VPP worksites

Alliance programsc

Strategic Partnershipsb

SHARP worksitesa

0

200

400

1,200

1,000

800

600

Source: OSHA.
Page 21 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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.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.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 

 22Of 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. 

23Although 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. 

OSHA’s Expansion of 

Voluntary Compliance 

Programs May Tax Its 

Limited Resources 
Page 22 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

increases in OSHA’s total budget over this period.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 

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. 

 24While 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. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Percent of OSHA’s budget

Source: GAO analysis. 

1996

($345)

1997

($362)

1998

($370)

1999

($384)

2000

($408)

2001

($455)

2002

($453)

2003

($450)

OSHA programs (Total budget in millionsa

)

Enforcement

Voluntary compliance strategies

Other programsb
Page 23 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.” 

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 
Page 24 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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 recertifications 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. 
Page 25 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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. 

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 visited25 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 

 25We 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. 

Voluntary Strategies 

Appear to Have Many 

Positive Outcomes, 

but the Absence of 

Comprehensive Data 

Limits Assessment 

Participants, OSHA 

Managers, and Specialists 

Cited Reduced Injuries and 

Illnesses and Other 

Benefits 

Reduced Injuries and Illnesses 

for Participating Employers 
Page 26 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

A second benefit of voluntary compliance programs is decreased costs to 

employers, primarily through reductions in workers’ compensation 

premiums.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. 

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 

 26The 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. 

Lower Costs 

Improved Relationships with 

OSHA and between Employers 

and Employees 
Page 27 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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. 

Increased Responsibility for 

Safety by Management and 

Employees 
Page 28 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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 

Safety and Health 

Improvements for 

Nonparticipating Employers 

Improved Safety and Health for 

Small Employers 
Page 29 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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.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 

 27Since 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. 

Because OSHA Has Just 

Begun to Collect and 

Analyze Data on Its 

Voluntary Compliance 

Programs, Their 

Effectiveness Cannot Be 

Fully Assessed 
Page 30 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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 
Page 31 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

OSHA collect additional data to use in evaluating its impact.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.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.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.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 

 28U.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). 

29John 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). 

30OSHA 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. 

31TATC 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). 
Page 32 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

partnerships it analyzed to evaluate their impact.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. 

 32U.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). 
Page 33 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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.) 

 33To 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. 

Researchers and 

Other Specialists 

Suggested a Variety of 

Additional Voluntary 

Compliance Strategies 
Page 34 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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 

Provide More Incentives 

for Employers to Make 

Safety and Health 

Improvements 
Page 35 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

through its alliances and other voluntary programs.34 As useful as industryspecific 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.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.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.37 Figure 10 describes the 

relationship between workers’ compensation and occupational safety and 

health programs in two states. 

 34For example, see http://www.osha.gov.Publications/JSHQ/fall2002html/safety_health.htm

and http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/smallbusiness/safetypays.html.

35Workers’ 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. 

36OSHA 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). 

37OSHA has an alliance with one private insurer and has involved insurers in several 

partnerships. 
Page 36 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

• 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.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 sitespecific targeting program as having high rates of injuries and illnesses, 

 38One 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. 
Page 37 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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.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. 

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 employeemanagement 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.41 Because employers are increasingly using 

contractors and temporary workers, focusing employers’ attention on 

 39A 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. 

40According to OSHA, the agency’s decision was appealed to a U.S. district court in New 

York in October 2003. 

41VPP 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. 

Promote More Systematic 

Approaches to Workplace 

Safety and Health 
Page 38 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

contractors’ and suppliers’ safety and health records was considered a 

useful way to achieve some leverage in a changing economy.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.43

• Require Certain Employers to Have Safety and Health Management 

Programs—As discussed in a previous GAO report and testimony,44 OSHA 

could require certain employers—such as those with high injury and 

illness rates—to have safety and health management programs.45 The 

establishment of safety and health programs, including elements such as 

hazard prevention and control, is currently required for participants in the 

 42Voluntary 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. 

43Making it a requirement might raise a number of legal concerns, including whether such a 

requirement would exceed OSHA’s authority under the OSH Act. 

44U.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). 

45OSHA 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. 
Page 39 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

VPP, Strategic Partnership, and SHARP programs.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.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.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.49 If required for all 

employers, such committees might raise additional issues, including the 

determination of who would represent workers.50

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 

 46About 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. 

47See GAO/T-HRD-92-15, p. 2.

48This suggestion was also discussed in a previous GAO report: See GAO/HRD-90-66BR, pp.

48-50. 

49Oregon makes it mandatory for most employers to have a joint management-labor safety 

committee. 

50To 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). 

Focus More on HighHazard, High-Injury 

Workplaces 
Page 40 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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.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.53

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 

 51The 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. 

52Requirements 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. 

53OSHA 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. 

Use Third-Party 

Approaches 
Page 41 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

for achieving International Organization for Standardization standards.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.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.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 

 54The 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. 

55OSHA 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. 

56The 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. 
Page 42 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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.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 thirdparty consultants.58

 57One 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. 

58See S. Rep. No. 106-202, at 25-26, 63-64 (1999). 
Page 43 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

In order to strengthen OSHA’s voluntary compliance strategies, the 

Secretary of Labor should direct the Assistant Secretary for Occupational 

Safety and Health to 

Conclusions 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 
Page 44 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

• 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. 

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 sitespecific 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 OSHAsponsored 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. 

Agency Comments 
Page 45 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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, 

Robert E. Robertson 

Director, Education, Workforce, 

 and Income Security Issues 
Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

Page 46 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Appendix I: Comments from the 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear at 

the end of this appendix. 

See comment 1. 
Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

Page 47 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

See comment 2. 
Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational 

Safety and Health Administration 

Page 48 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

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. 

GAO Comments 
Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 49 GAO-04-378 Workplace Safety and Health 

Revae E. Moran, (202) 512-3863 

Deborah A. Signer, (202) 512-7158 

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. 

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(130240) 
The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and 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. 

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 fulltext 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. 

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 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

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 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs