Workplace Safety and Health: OSHA's Voluntary Compliance Strategies Show Promising Results, but Should be Fully Evaluated Before They Are Expanded
Published: 2004-03-19T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: 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.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Workplace injuries and illnesses affect millions of workers each year,  often changing their lives and reducing employers’ profitability through  higher costs and lowered productivity. Ensuring safe and healthy  conditions at the 7 million U.S. worksites that employ 114 million workers  is the responsibility of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration  (OSHA). The agency’s enforcement program—primarily conducting  inspections of employers’ worksites—has been the foundation of its  efforts to ensure compliance with federal laws and regulations. However,  OSHA can only inspect a small fraction of all worksites each year. In 2002,  for example, the agency and its state counterparts conducted almost  96,000 inspections. Furthermore, the growth in the number of worksites  over time, as well as changes in the workplace, have added to OSHA’s  challenge. To help meet its responsibilities, the agency has increasingly  supplemented its enforcement efforts with “voluntary compliance  strategies.” These are initiatives in which OSHA invites employers to work  cooperatively with the agency to protect the safety and health of workers.  While in the past enforcement has been the agency’s predominant  approach to achieving its mission, voluntary strategies may provide  important opportunities to extend the agency’s influence.
Given the desirability of reaching additional employers and employing  OSHA’s resources most effectively, you asked us to provide you with  information on (1) the types of voluntary compliance strategies OSHA uses  to improve workplace safety and health and the extent to which it reaches  employers through these strategies, (2) the effectiveness of these  voluntary compliance strategies, and (3) additional strategies that could  further OSHA’s mission to protect the safety and health of workers. We  focused our review on OSHA’s four voluntary compliance programs: the  Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP), the State Consultation Program, the  Strategic Partnership Program, and the Alliance Program.
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.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act in 1970 to  ensure safe and healthy working conditions for every worker in the nation.  OSHA has responsibility for enforcing the provisions of the act, including  overseeing most worksites, with the exception of some small employers in  low-hazard industries and small farming operations. OSHA has direct  enforcement responsibility for about half the states; the remainder have  been granted authority for their own enforcement. At present, 22 states  have been approved by OSHA to operate their own programs covering all  worksites; 4 are approved for covering public sector employee worksites  only; and OSHA directly oversees all worksites in the remaining states.
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.  OSHA has four basic requirements for a safety and health management  program:  (1) Management Leadership and Employee Involvement—Top-level  management must be committed to carrying out written comprehensive  safety and health programs. Employees must be actively involved in the  execution of the program.  (2) Worksite Analysis—Employers must have a thorough understanding  of all hazardous situations to which employees may be exposed, as well as  the ability to recognize and correct these hazards.  (3) Hazard Prevention and Controls—The program must have clear  procedures for preventing and controlling hazards identified through  worksite analysis, such as a hazard tracking system and a written system  for monitoring and maintaining workplace equipment.  (4) Safety and Health Training—Training is necessary to reinforce and  complement management’s commitment to safety and health and to  ensure that all employees understand how to avoid exposure to hazards.
To keep pace with the increasing demands on OSHA staff to help  administer and promote voluntary compliance programs, in 2001 OSHA  created the new position of “compliance assistance specialist.” According  to OSHA officials, funding for this position was authorized in fiscal year  2002. Compliance assistance specialists provide general information about  OSHA standards and promote voluntary compliance programs, as well as  OSHA’s compliance assistance resources, such as training and Web site  resources. They also respond to requests for help from a variety of groups  and participate in numerous seminars, workshops, and speaking events.  Most specialists are former OSHA compliance officers who conducted  inspections of employers’ worksites. In their new positions, the specialists  are not involved in OSHA’s enforcement activities. There is one  Compliance Assistant Specialist position in each OSHA area office in  states under federal jurisdiction, with a total of 65 in fiscal year 2003.
OSHA’s strategic management plan identifies particular safety and health  problems and industries on which to focus the agency’s efforts. In its  current 5-year plan for years 2003 through 2008, one of the agency’s three  goals is to promote a safety and health culture through compliance  assistance, cooperative programs, and strong leadership. This goal  includes increasing the number of participants in voluntary compliance  programs and improving the programs’ effectiveness. Another goal is to  reduce occupational hazards by, for example, reducing the rate of  workplace injuries and illnesses by 5 percent annually. OSHA’s third goal  focuses on strengthening the agency’s capabilities and infrastructure,  including improving the agency’s access to accurate, timely data, and  enhancing its measures for assessing the effectiveness of its programs.
section_title: OSHA Has Employed a Variety of Voluntary Compliance Strategies, Which Has Extended the Agency’s Reach to a Growing Number of Employers
paragraphs: 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.
subsections: section_title: Voluntary Compliance Programs Are Designed to Reach a Range of Employers
paragraphs: 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).
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.
subsections: section_title: State Consultation Program
paragraphs: 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. The agency funds all state governments to  carry out the program. In fiscal year 2003, OSHA provided $53 million to  state governments. States provide free consultation visits at employers’  requests to identify safety and health hazards and discuss techniques for  their abatement. In fiscal year 2003, state agents conducted about 28,900  consultation visits. The names of employers receiving consultation visits  are kept confidential and separate from OSHA enforcement officials.  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. Participants in SHARP  must have safety and health programs, which are management programs,  in place to prevent and control occupational hazards. In fiscal year 2003,  there were 699 SHARP worksites in both federal OSHA states and state- plan states. Although SHARP worksites are exempt from scheduled  inspections, they are still subject to inspections resulting from employee  complaints and other serious safety and health problems, such as  fatalities.
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. The manufacturing and chemical  industries comprise 21 percent and 20 percent of these recognized  worksites, respectively (see fig. 2).
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.
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. As of September 30, 2003, 92 percent of all VPP worksites in  federal OSHA states have Star designation. To be eligible for this  exemplary status, employers must meet a number of specific requirements  for their worksite: (1) worksite injury and illness rates must be below the  average rate for their industry sector for at least 1 of the 3 most recent  years; (2) a safety and health program must have been implemented and  maintained for at least 1 year; and (3) worksites must undergo and pass a  comprehensive review by OSHA personnel, including an on-site review of  the facility and interviews with management officials and employees. In  exchange for OSHA recognition, VPP worksites are exempt from  scheduled enforcement inspections. However, VPP worksites are still  subject to inspections resulting from employee complaints and other  significant events, such as fatalities.
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.
section_title: Strategic Partnership Program
paragraphs: The Strategic Partnership Program, formalized in 1998, is designed to help  groups of employers and employees working at multiple worksites in high- hazard workplaces to address a specific safety and health problem. As of  September 2003, 66 percent of partnerships are construction-related. A  partnership agreement sets goals, such as the reduction of injuries,  specifies a plan for achieving them, and provides procedures for verifying  their completion. Some partnership agreements may also require the  development of a safety and health management program and the  involvement of employees in carrying out the partnership agreement. The  program does not offer exemption from enforcement inspections but does  offer other incentives. These include limiting scheduled inspections on  only the most serious prevailing hazards, penalty reductions for any  hazards cited during an inspection, and priority consideration for the State  Consultation Program.
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).
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.
section_title: Alliance Program
paragraphs: The Alliance Program targets trade, professional, and other types of  organizations to work collaboratively with OSHA to promote workplace  safety and health issues. Alliances can be formed through national or  regional offices. As of September 2003, approximately 51 percent of  OSHA’s national alliances were with trade associations and 38 percent  were with professional associations. The Alliance Program, which  included 100 alliances as of September 2003, is one of OSHA’s newest and  least structured voluntary compliance programs. In contrast to the other  three voluntary compliance programs which typically include safety and  health programs at specific employer worksites, alliance agreements focus  on goals such as training, outreach, and increasing awareness of  workplace safety and health issues. To date, alliances have participated in  a variety of activities, such as (1) creating electronic informational tools  that have been posted on the OSHA Web site, (2) developing industry- specific voluntary guidelines and training materials, and (3) improving  OSHA’s training courses. Alliance members are not exempt from OSHA  inspections and do not receive any enforcement-related incentives for  joining an alliance. Instead, OSHA officials informed us that trade and  professional associations have used the Alliance Program as a proactive  method of addressing existing and emerging workplace safety and health  issues, such as ergonomic issues. As of September 2003, 41 percent of  OSHA’s national alliances were ergonomic-related. See figure 7 for an  example of an ergonomic-related alliance.
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. In fiscal year 2003, OSHA funded 67 such training  grants totaling over $11 million.
The agency provides outreach to employers and workers in a number of  other ways, such as through newsletters, brochures, compact discs,  speeches, and conferences. OSHA also mails materials on specific safety  and health issues to target audiences. Regional officials we spoke with  said that several OSHA staff are called upon to conduct outreach efforts  because it requires specialized skills and knowledge of standards. OSHA  also works in cooperation the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Small  Business Development Centers. 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.
section_title: Participation in Voluntary Compliance Has Grown in the Past Decade, and OSHA Plans Dramatic Increases
paragraphs: 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. 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. (See  fig. 8.)
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. 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.
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.
section_title: OSHA’s Expansion of Voluntary Compliance Programs May Tax Its Limited Resources
paragraphs: 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. 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. During this same period, the proportion of resources OSHA  dedicated to its enforcement activities fell by 6 percent, from about 63  percent to about 56 percent of the agency’s total budget, although the total  funds devoted to enforcement have remained fairly constant because of  increases in OSHA’s total budget over this period. 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).
Notwithstanding their voluntary nature, all of OSHA’s voluntary  compliance programs require agency oversight to ensure that participants  comply with requirements or agreements and this growing administrative  responsibility requires concerted agency resources. For example:    To certify a worksite as a VPP worksite requires a comprehensive on-site  review that usually lasts 1 week and involves approximately three to five  OSHA personnel. In contrast to the SHARP on-site review, VPP employers  use their own resources to implement their safety and health programs  and the program must be functional before OSHA personnel come to the  worksite to conduct the on-site review for Star approval. Additionally,  OSHA reviews participants’ yearly self-evaluations to ensure that injury  and illness rates have not increased beyond program requirements and any  changes that have been made to the safety and health program.  Furthermore, VPP worksites must be recertified every 1 to 5 years,  depending on their VPP designation. A VPP worksite recertification  involves an additional on-site review by OSHA personnel, similar in  duration and comprehensiveness to the original on-site review.
In the Strategic Partnership Program, OSHA conducts verification  inspections for a percentage of partner worksites to ensure that partners  are abiding by the partnership agreement.
The Alliance Program involves quarterly meetings with Alliance members  to ensure progress towards alliance goals are being met. Additionally,  OSHA training staff reviews all alliance training materials to ensure their  accuracy with OSHA standards.
Furthermore, while the State Consultation Program is run by the states,  OSHA largely funds the program, and its plans to expand the SHARP  program will require additional agency resources and oversight on the part  of state consultants. State consultants must work closely with employers  to help them improve and implement their safety and health programs  because most small employers do not have the resources necessary to  attain SHARP status on their own. The consultant also must conduct a  one-or-more day on-site review of the worksite to ensure that the  employer has addressed all workplace hazards and properly implemented  a safety and health program. Additionally, SHARP worksites are  reevaluated every 1 to 2 years, depending on the amount of time a  worksite has been in the program and the recommendation of the state  consultant. These reevaluations require another on-site review of the  worksite by the state consultants.
Expansion of OSHA’s voluntary compliance programs as planned will  further require such resources, particularly for the oversight of a much  larger number of program participants. According to national and regional  OSHA officials we spoke with, expanding the voluntary compliance  programs to the intended levels will be difficult given OSHA’s current  resources, and some expressed concern that too much expansion of some  programs may compromise program quality. Of particular concern to  them, they said, has been the agency’s continued focus on increasing the  number of VPP worksites. Several regional officials—whose offices are  responsible for conducting on-site reviews—said that increasing the  number of VPP worksites would strain their resources because of the  number of staff required to conduct reviews of new worksites and re- certifications of existing worksites.
To date, regional offices have been creative in their methods of handling  the increasing number of participants in voluntary compliance programs.  For instance, the offices have relied increasingly on the use of the Special  Government Employee Program and the Mentoring Program, both a part  of the VPP. The first allows employees from VPP worksites, at the expense  of their employers, to assist OSHA employees in conducting on-site  reviews. OSHA uses the Mentoring Program to match VPP candidates with  VPP employers, who assist the candidates in improving their safety and  health programs and preparing for the on-site reviews. These two  programs allow OSHA to leverage its resources by using employees at VPP  worksites to assist OSHA in carrying out the responsibilities involved in  operating the program, decreasing the number of OSHA personnel needed.
While several regional OSHA officials said these strategies have allowed  them to manage the increase in VPP applicants, they are unsure how many  more they can accommodate without obtaining additional resources.
section_title: Voluntary Strategies Appear to Have Many Positive Outcomes, but the Absence of Comprehensive Data Limits Assessment
paragraphs: 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.
subsections: section_title: Participants, OSHA Managers, and Specialists Cited Reduced Injuries and Illnesses and Other Benefits
paragraphs: 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.
subsections: section_title: Reduced Injuries and Illnesses for Participating Employers
paragraphs: The most commonly cited benefit of participating in OSHA’s voluntary  compliance programs was the reduction in the number and rate of injuries  and illnesses. All nine employers we visited reported that the number of  injuries and illnesses at their worksites had declined since they began  participating in the programs. For example, one VPP site in the paper  industry reported that it typically had 12 to 14 accidents that resulted in  injuries each year before working toward VPP approval, but that the  worksite has reduced that number to 5 accidents or fewer in the last   3 years. Another participant, a partnership comprising eight nursing  homes, reported in its annual evaluation that the injury and illness rate for  its second year of participation had decreased 27 percent. OSHA, based on  limited analysis of VPP sites’ annual injury and illness data, reported that  participating employers that had effectively implemented workplace safety  and health programs had significantly fewer injuries and illnesses—54  percent fewer—than comparable worksites in the same industries that had  not implemented such programs.
section_title: Lower Costs
paragraphs: A second benefit of voluntary compliance programs is decreased costs to  employers, primarily through reductions in workers’ compensation  premiums. 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.
section_title: Improved Relationships with OSHA and between Employers and Employees
paragraphs: According to employers and employees at worksites we visited, voluntary  compliance programs also improved their relationships with OSHA and  improved the relationships between management officials and employees.  At every worksite we visited, representatives told us they were very  comfortable with interacting with OSHA. Some spoke of a change from  fearing OSHA’s visits to seeing them as helpful. For example, management  officials at a steel erector company commented that, before their  partnership, management did not want to talk to OSHA and dreaded its  visits whereas, after participating in the partnership, they have a good  relationship with OSHA staff. Several representatives at the worksites we  visited also commented that they now regularly call OSHA for answers to  safety problems. Some employees at the sites also commented that they  have seen improved relationships with OSHA. For example, the union  president at a VPP site said that, as a result of the close interaction with  OSHA staff during the VPP approval process, he feels comfortable calling  OSHA directly to discuss safety and health issues.
Similarly, employees and employers at several worksites gave examples of  how their participation in these programs resulted in improved  relationships between management and employees. One safety director for  a union involved in a partnership said that after some workers were fired  for not complying with safety rules, they came to the union looking for  support, but because of the involvement of the union in the partnership,  the union supported the disciplinary action. Both management and  employees recounted how important working together was during the  approval process and how those efforts have continued in order to  maintain their participation in the programs, often through team meetings  and safety committee meetings.
section_title: Increased Responsibility for Safety by Management and Employees
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: Safety and Health Improvements for Nonparticipating Employers
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: Improved Safety and Health for Small Employers
paragraphs: Several participants and specialists reported that the State Consultation  Program, Alliance Program, and OSHA’s outreach and training help inform  small employers—who typically have less in-house expertise to address  safety and health issues—about how to make safety and health  improvements. The State Consultation Program, which is designed to  provide guidance on specific problems or, more generally, employers’  health and safety management programs, is targeted to small employers.  The three sites we visited that utilized this program had initially sought  consultations because they needed expert advice on safety and health  practices that was not available from their own staff. According to several  specialists, the Alliance Program also connects with small businesses by  working through the trade associations that they participate in, because  the associations build on already existing relationships. In addition, the  OSHA regional offices we visited had used several outreach approaches to  reach out to small employers, for example, a free forum where small  contractors could learn the proper use of cranes and scaffolding. Similarly,  one of OSHA’s area offices provided employers training courses at the  local Small Business Development Center on OSHA’s requirements— including its record-keeping requirements—and how good safety and  health practices can save them money. Regional offices have also  developed newsletters for employers in specific industries, such as a letter  and accompanying compact disc on electrical hazards provided by one  office to electrical contractors.
Although we saw evidence of OSHA’s efforts to reach more small  businesses, several specialists said OSHA should include more small  businesses in voluntary compliance program activity. A representative  from a national employers association commented that smaller employers  fear OSHA because they do not know what to expect when the agency  goes into a business, even if for compliance assistance activities. Several  specialists with whom we spoke noted that smaller businesses might not  be aware of the voluntary compliance programs that are available. A  representative from an insurance company who addresses risk  management regularly commented that smaller worksites, particularly  those that change locations frequently such as sites in the construction  and roofing industries, are more likely to have safety problems.
section_title: Because OSHA Has Just Begun to Collect and Analyze Data on Its Voluntary Compliance Programs, Their Effectiveness Cannot Be Fully Assessed
paragraphs: 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. Currently, OSHA does not collect complete,  comparable data needed to measure the value of its programs, including  their relative impact, resource use, and effect on the agency’s mission. In  OSHA’s current strategic management plan, one of the agency’s three  goals includes increasing the number of participants in voluntary  compliance programs and improving the programs’ effectiveness. Another  goal includes improving the agency’s access to accurate, timely data, and  enhancing its measures for assessing the effectiveness of its programs.  However, OSHA has not yet developed a comprehensive strategic  framework that articulates how the programs fit together in accomplishing  the agency’s goals or how its resources should be allocated among the  various programs. While OSHA or its state representatives ensure that  voluntary program participants are complying with the programs’  requirements, and often obtains some information on program  effectiveness, such as data on injuries and illness, it does not assess the  overall impact of the programs on worksites’ safety and health.
Currently, OSHA’s assessments of each program are at a different stage of  development and the approaches vary:    VPP—Presently, OSHA’s analysis of the program is limited to reviewing  VPP sites’ annual injury and illness rates in the years immediately before  they are approved for the program. However, because worksites often  make safety and health improvements over a longer period in anticipation  of their participation in the program but before they are approved, the  rates OSHA reviews may not reflect changes in injury and illness rates  from improvements made as a result of their participation. To assess the  impact of VPP, OSHA contracted with a private firm in October 2003 to  conduct an evaluation of the changes in participating employers’ injury  and illness rates resulting from the program. The evaluation, to be  completed in September 2004, will evaluate the impact of VPP from the  point at which employers decide to apply for VPP until they are designated  a VPP site. It will also determine the impact of VPP on other worksites  through participating employers’ outreach and mentoring efforts and  provide data on dollars spent by VPP sites on safety and health programs  and cost savings from reduced workers’ compensation costs. However,  because VPP does not require applicants to provide data on their injury  and illness rates for the years prior to participation, OSHA will still be  unable to systematically assess whether improvements in their injury and  illness rates resulted from program participation.
State Consultation Program—OSHA has been assessing possible  approaches for obtaining data on these programs, but it has been difficult  because of the confidentiality that state programs provide to program  participants. In an October 2001 report on the program, we suggested that  OSHA collect additional data to use in evaluating its impact. 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. 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. 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. For example, some partnerships did not  submit evaluation reports, while others provided incomplete or  inconsistent information because OSHA allowed participants to select the  types of data reported. Similarly, the U. S. Department of Labor’s Office of  Inspector General, which also assessed the program, reported in  September 2002 that there was insufficient information on five of the nine  partnerships it analyzed to evaluate their impact. 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.
section_title: Researchers and Other Specialists Suggested a Variety of Additional Voluntary Compliance Strategies
paragraphs: 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. 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.)
subsections: section_title: Provide More Incentives for Employers to Make Safety and Health Improvements
paragraphs: Specific suggestions for additional financial incentives included   (1) providing information to employers on the possible financial and other  benefits of improving safety and health, (2) encouraging the use of  workers’ compensation incentives for employers that participate in  OSHA’s voluntary compliance programs, and (3) creating tax incentives  for improvements. Another suggestion was to deter employers from  continuing poor safety and health practices by publishing injury and  illness rates for such worksites.
Develop and Publicize Information on Financial Benefits—To  counter employer assumptions that safety and health improvements would  necessarily be costly, some specialists called for the agency to develop and  publicize more industry-specific data about the financial and other  benefits possible by investing in safety and health improvements. OSHA  provides general information about the direct and indirect costs of injuries  and illnesses on its Web site and is working to develop more industry data  through its alliances and other voluntary programs. As useful as industry- specific information might be, especially to small employers, such  proprietary data are difficult to obtain and expensive to develop,  according to specialists. Developing this information might also be a better  role for industry than for government. In addition, improving safety and  health could cost employers more money, not less.
Encourage Workers’ Compensation Incentives—OSHA could  encourage state programs and private insurers to consider employers’  participation in voluntary compliance programs when they calculate  premiums for employers. 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. 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. Figure 10 describes the  relationship between workers’ compensation and occupational safety and  health programs in two states.
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. For example, a subcontractor might find it  difficult to obtain a contract because of liability concerns if it were known  that the company had a high rate of workplace injuries. Right now, OSHA  publishes the names of about 3,200 worksites identified through its site- specific targeting program as having high rates of injuries and illnesses,  but it does not publish the actual rates for these worksites. However, there  are several potential problems with this approach. First, injury and illness  rates for one particular year may not accurately capture the performance  of employers, especially small employers. 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. 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.
section_title: Promote More Systematic Approaches to Workplace Safety and Health
paragraphs: Specific suggestions from researchers and specialists included   (1) encouraging employers that participate in OSHA’s voluntary programs  to influence their contractors and suppliers to make safety and health  improvements, (2) requiring certain employers to have a safety and health  management program, and (3) requiring employers to have an employee- management safety and health committee.
Encourage Employers to Influence Contractors and Suppliers—To  “influence the supply chain,” OSHA could encourage employers  participating in its voluntary programs to consider suppliers and  contractors’ safety and health records before making contracting decisions  and encourage their suppliers and contractors to have a safety and health  program. OSHA currently requires this approach of employers  participating in VPP. Because employers are increasingly using  contractors and temporary workers, focusing employers’ attention on  contractors’ and suppliers’ safety and health records was considered a  useful way to achieve some leverage in a changing economy. 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.
Require Certain Employers to Have Safety and Health Management  Programs—As discussed in a previous GAO report and testimony, OSHA  could require certain employers—such as those with high injury and  illness rates—to have safety and health management programs. The  establishment of safety and health programs, including elements such as  hazard prevention and control, is currently required for participants in the  VPP, Strategic Partnership, and SHARP programs. 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.
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. The VPP does not  require employers to have such a committee at every worksite, but does  consider it one way to achieve employee involvement. If required for all  employers, such committees might raise additional issues, including the  determination of who would represent workers.
section_title: Focus More on High- Hazard, High-Injury Workplaces
paragraphs: Specific suggestions for focusing more on high-hazard, high-injury  workplaces included targeting employers with the highest levels of injury  and illness for voluntary programs and having such employers choose  between likely inspection and cooperative approaches with the agency.
Target Employers with Highest Levels of Injury and Illness—OSHA  could classify employers according to their level of injury and illness and  focus the agency’s voluntary compliance efforts on those with the highest  rates. While this suggestion was seen as a way for OSHA to best use its  limited resources, according to specialists, it might also entail additional  costs for data development.
Allow Employers to Choose between Likely Inspection and  Cooperative Approaches—Another suggestion was for OSHA to pursue  a previously attempted strategy targeting employers with the highest rates  of injury and illness. 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. 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.
section_title: Use Third-Party Approaches
paragraphs: Specific suggestions for third-party approaches included (1) supporting  the development of a voluntary national or international standard for  workplace safety and health and (2) using private consultants to conduct  safety and health evaluations of worksites.
Support Development of a Voluntary National or International  Standard for Workplace Safety and Health—Having a voluntary  national or international standard could help strengthen the infrastructure  for workplace safety and health and could build on some employers’  desire for a widely recognized credential that could be useful to them in  competing with other companies, especially in global markets. For  example, employers can seek certification from independent organizations  for achieving International Organization for Standardization standards.  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.  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. Using consultants could leverage  existing OSHA resources by helping workplaces that might never  otherwise see an OSHA inspector, especially small employers, and  possibly also by enabling employers to address additional safety and  health issues that might not be covered under an OSHA inspection for  compliance with standards. At the same time, using consultants also raises  various implementation, oversight, and legal issues described below. (a) Implementation—A key issue is that consultants’ independence may  be compromised if employers paid consultants directly for conducting  audits and certifying employers. Employers might also need more than  one consultant to conduct a comprehensive review of both safety and  health issues. Finally, the use of consultants would set the federal program  in competition with the State Consultation Program, according to OSHA  officials.  (b) Oversight—One issue is what kind of oversight is possible when  employers will not—or cannot—make improvements that consultants  recommend. Another is that differences in consultants’ focus would create  inconsistencies in the certification process, since a workplace evaluation  could focus on compliance with OSHA standards or on the broader safety  and health environment, as under OSHA’s VPP, Partnership, and SHARP  programs.  (c) Legality—Finally, constitutional issues have been raised as to whether  OSHA can use private consultants, as envisioned by the SAFE Act, to  conduct safety and health evaluations of employers’ worksites and to issue  certificates of compliance, exempting employers from civil penalties for a  limited period of time. For example, when Congress was considering the  SAFE Act, the Justice Department argued that the act might be  unconstitutional because, among other things, it delegated executive  functions to private entities without providing adequate supervision or  accountability for their activities. The Senate Committee on Health,  Education, Labor, and Pensions, which had jurisdiction over the  legislation, disagreed with Justice’s arguments, asserting that they  reflected a misunderstanding of the proposed role and authority of third- party consultants.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: In order to strengthen OSHA’s voluntary compliance strategies, the  Secretary of Labor should direct the Assistant Secretary for Occupational  Safety and Health to  identify cost-effective methods of collecting complete, comparable data on  program outcomes for the VPP and Partnership programs to use in  assessing their effectiveness, and continue to search for cost-effective  approaches that will enable the agency to assess the effectiveness of the  State Consultation and Alliance programs, and   develop a strategic framework that articulates the purposes and  distinctions of the different voluntary compliance programs, sets priorities  among these programs, and identifies how the agency’s resources should  be allocated among these programs, before further expanding them.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to OSHA for comment. OSHA’s formal  comments and our responses are contained in appendix I. In addition to its  written comments, OSHA provided us with technical comments, which we  incorporated as appropriate.
OSHA generally agreed with our findings, conclusions, and  recommendations. The agency asserted, however, that we had based our  recommendations on a small sample of worksites and that our  methodology for selecting researchers and specialists was not scientific  and was subject to biases. We did not base our recommendations on site- specific findings or on interviews with researchers and specialists, but  rather on programwide data. More specifically, our recommendations  were based on our analyses of OSHA’s program requirements and program  data as well as the findings and conclusions reported in the OSHA- sponsored and Inspector General evaluations of these programs that were  cited in our report. Although our selection of researchers and specialists  was, by necessity, judgmental, we sought to obtain a broad, balanced  range of perspectives and expertise about the programs’ effectiveness.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents  earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after its  issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Secretary  of Labor and the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and  Health and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to  others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge  on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Please contact me or Revae Moran on (202) 512-7215 if you or your staff  have any questions about this report. Other contacts and staff  acknowledgments are listed in appendix II.
section_title: Appendix I: Comments from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
subsections: section_title: GAO Comments
paragraphs: 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.
section_title: Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: 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.