NIST SAFETY UPDATE

NIST VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

GAITHERSBURG, MD

OCTOBER 7, 1014

RICHARD KAYSER

CHIEF SAFETY OFFICER

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SAFETY, HEALTH, AND ENVIRONMENT (OSHE)
Agenda

Safet y 

Clim at e 

Assessment

Discussion

NIST Safet y 

Incident 

Met rics
PAGE 

NIST Safety Incident Metrics 3

GOAL

ZERO

35

32

34

39

46

42

35

23

15

23

15

10

18

16

23

21

13

11

FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014

Recordables

DART Cases

Num ber of cases
PAGE 

FY14 OSHA Recordable Cases 4

Employee was using a hand drill to put in a self-tapping screw. Employee lacerated left thumb with drill bit.

Employee was walking outside and slipped for no known reason. Employee injured right knee and right shoulder as a result of fall.

Employee was closing cabinet drawer after filing. Employee sprained finger when it was closed in drawer. 

Employee was removing ice build-up on the louvers of chilled-water 

cooling towers.

Employee experienced tightening of and pain in the lower back 

and right shoulder.

Employee was walking on icy stairs, lost balance, and fell. Employee experienced pain in both knees and lower back.

Employee was tightening bolt using long-handled socket wrench. Employee experienced sharp and sudden pain in the lower back, 

shooting down the leg.

Employee was exiting vehicle in parking lot and slipped on ice, no fall. Employee experienced pain in back.

Employee was manually loading a heavy object onto a truck. Employee experienced pain in lower abdomen area.

Employee tripped on the curb. Employee sustained a cut lip and an abrasion on the index finger.

Employee walking in a hallway slipped on a wet spot on the floor. Employee experienced pain in the right foot and bruise on left 

elbow.

Employee was demonstrating a knife technique to other employees. One of the other employees received a laceration to the hand.

Employee was walking past a smoker in front of Building 101. Employee became short of breath and began coughing.

Employee was returning from official NIST business via car and was 

rear-ended. Employee experienced pain to shoulder and arm.

Employee was moving about office area and tripped over box on 

floor. Employee experienced pain in knees and left wrist.

Employee was moving equipment when hit by a side panel that fell 

from a rack. Employee experienced pain in the lower back.

Event Injury

Slips, Trips, or Falls

DART Cases
PAGE 5

Incident Reporting

Tot al

Injury/Illness

Near Misses 

Exposure

Other

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Number of incidents reported

Fiscal Year
PAGE 6 PAGE 

Reduce the occurrence of the most common types of incidents 

resulting in OSHA recordable cases

Slips, Trips, and Falls Incident Reduction

42

19

23

8

35

9

21

8

23

9

13

5

15

6

11

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

NIST Recordables STF Recordables NIST DART Cases STF DART Cases

FY2011

FY2012

FY2013

FY2014

Number of cases

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

10 11 12 13 14 15

Fiscal Year

Percentage of OSHA recordable

cases related to STFs

“Baseline” – average for FY11 to FY13 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

10 11 12 13 14 15

“Baseline” – average for FY11 to FY13 

Fiscal Year

Percentage of DART cases

related to STFs
PAGE 7 PAGE 

Conduct a safety climate survey to 

assess progress in making safety an 

integral core value and vital part of 

the NIST culture, and compare the 

results to those of the safety climate 

survey completed in June 2011.

- 2013 VCAT RECOMMENDATION

Safety Climate Assessment (SCA)

7
PAGE 8

June

May

June

Aug/Oct

July/Aug

April

Conducted Survey

Compile/Analyze Responses

Developed Survey Statements

Obtained Feedback on Statements

Selected Focus Areas

Conducted Pilot

SCA Current Status

Progress since June 2014
PAGE 9

1 2 3 4 5

SCA Focus Areas

Five aspects of the NIST safety policy

9
PAGE 10

46%

2011

60%

2014

Other 

NIST 

Sites

Tot al Part icipat ion Sit e Part icipat ion 

61%

Gaithersburg

60%

Boulder

46%

Other

OU Part icipat ion Tot al Responses

1,908

896

38% to 100v %

Respondents

Comments

SCA Participation
PAGE 

Comparison to FY 2011 SCA

11

N I cannot always get the equipment I need to do my job safely. 3.78 4.01 6.1%

P I receive safety performance feedback during my annual employee evaluation. 3.47 3.67 5.9%

P I am clear about what my responsibilities are for safety and health. 4.12 4.33 5.2%

P Managers and supervisors express concern if safety procedures are not adhered to. 4.08 4.28 4.9%

N When people ignore safety procedures, it is none of my business. 4.25 4.37 2.8%

P There are always enough people available to get the job done safely. 3.59 3.68 2.5%

N Sometimes I am not given enough time to get the job done safely. 4.01 4.07 1.5%

N Sometimes it is necessary to depart from safety requirements for work’s sake. 3.96 4.02 1.5%

N Some safety rules and procedures don’t need to be followed to get the job done safely. 3.74 3.77 0.9%

N In my workplace, the chances of being involved in an accident are quite high. 4.12 4.13 0.2%

P I am strongly encouraged to report unsafe conditions. 4.23 4.20 -0.8%

P I am involved in informing management of important safety issues. 3.83 3.80 -0.8%

P There is good communication about safety issues that affect me. 3.93 3.87 -1.5%

P Co-workers often give tips to each other on how to work safely. 3.73 3.59 -3.8%

N Some health and safety rules are not really practical. 3.24 3.01 -7.0%

2011 % 

Improved 2014

Top 10

Bottom 10 Liekert Scoring: Top score=5, bottom score=1
PAGE 12

Composite Scores by SCA Focus Area

NIST-wide by Work Environment: Office, Lab, or Other 

Management 

Commitment 3.94 3.88 3.60

Adequacy of Resources 3.72 3.63 3.37

Em ployee Engagem ent 4.04 4.05 3.91

Personal Responsibility 

for Self 3.99 3.79 3.56

Personal Responsibility

for Others 3.53 3.58 3.40

Office Lab Ot her

Lowest two scores in each column 
PAGE 13

Composite Scores by SCA Focus Area

NIST-wide by Management Level

Management 

Commitment 3.86 4.03 4.22 4.24

Adequacy of Resources 3.65 3.73 3.85 3.96

Employee Engagement 3.99 4.23 4.43 4.64

Personal Responsibility 

for Self 3.86 4.01 4.29 4.55

Personal Responsibility

for Others 3.50 3.64 3.82 3.98

NonSupervisor

Division 

Chief

Group 

Leader OU Direct or

Lowest two scores in each column 
PAGE 14

Direct or 's Office Liekert SA A N D SD DK

NIST-level management 4.53 60.0% 36.7% 1.7% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0%

My OU management 4.56 60.0% 33.3% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7%

My Division management 4.55 60.0% 31.7% 3.3% 1.7% 0.0% 3.3%

My supervisor 4.53 57.6% 39.0% 1.7% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0%

Laborat ory Program s Liekert SA A N D SD DK

NIST-level management 4.49 57.3% 34.9% 4.6% 0.7% 1.1% 1.4%

My OU management 4.55 60.4% 33.0% 3.0% 1.0% 0.5% 2.0%

My Division management 4.50 58.2% 31.7% 4.9% 1.4% 0.6% 3.1%

My supervisor 4.51 60.1% 30.7% 5.5% 1.5% 0.5% 1.6%

Innovation & Indust ry 

Services Liekert SA A N D SD DK

NIST-level management 4.72 72.3% 27.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

My OU management 4.73 72.3% 26.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5%

My Division management 4.69 67.7% 26.2% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 4.6%

My supervisor 4.75 75.4% 21.5% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5%

Managem ent Resources Liekert SA A N D SD DK

NIST-level management 4.27 44.4% 43.2% 7.4% 1.8% 2.3% 0.9%

My OU management 4.33 48.8% 38.4% 7.9% 1.8% 1.8% 1.4%

My Division management 4.34 50.1% 37.8% 6.9% 2.3% 1.6% 1.4%

My supervisor 4.37 52.6% 36.2% 6.5% 2.3% 1.6% 0.9%

Score Breakdown Example

“...clearly considers the safety of employees to be of great importance.”

14
PAGE 15

Potential Opportunities for Improvement 

Based on preliminary analysis

Safet y Training 

Effect iveness

Safet y 

Perform ance 

Feedback & 

Appraisals

Com m unicat ing 

Resource Needs 

Up & Availability 

Down 

Safet y Program 

Development & 

Deployment

Addressing 

Em ployee Safet y 

Concerns

Effect ive Safet y 

Leadership Trait s 

for 

St rengt hening 

Safet y Cult ure

Incident Report ing 

Thresholds & Access 

t o Dat a & Lessons 

Learned

Percept ions of 

Personal 

Responsibilit y 

for Safet y of Self 

and Others
PAGE 

Next Steps

16

What Who When

Complete analysis of employee responses OSHE Oct

Present results to the Executive Safety 

Committee OSHE Nov

Recommend actions to the NIST Director 

and Associate Directors

Executive Safety 

Committee Nov/Dec

Decide on actions to be taken NIST Director and 

Associate Directors Dec

Communicate SCA results and actions

to the NIST Staff

NIST Director, Line 

Management, OSHE Jan

Take actions NIST management 

and staff Ongoing
PAGE 17

DISCUSSION

17