249545 Rating Safety and Health Performance in Construction

Monday, October 31, 2011: 12:56 PM

Elizabeth Haile, MS , CPWR The Center for Construction Research and Training, Silver Spring
Janie Gittleman, Ph, D , CPWR The Center for Construction Research and Training, Md, MD
John Rosecrance, PhD, PT, CPE , Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft Collins, CO
Paige Gardner , Occupational Health Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
Natalie Shwatka , Department of Environmental and Radiological Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
Peter Chen, PhD , School of Public Health, Department of Occupational Health Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
Paul Esposito, CIH, CSP , ESIS Inc. Health, Safety and Environmental Services, Annapolis, MD
Stewart Burkhammer, CSP , Burkhammer Consulting, Deland, FL
Safety and Health Performance Metrics for the Construction Industry Background: Construction is a hazardous industry. Many construction employers are striving for new approaches to reduce injury and illness rates, and are looking for a proven set of metrics to monitor safety and health performance. Historically, measuring health and safety performance in the construction industry has relied mainly on lagging indicators which follow an event. Because of the drawbacks associated with using only lagging indicators, many companies are now developing leading and financial indicators to measure and track actions, events, processes and costs that precede and influence safety and health performance. This study was conducted to identify which metrics will be most important and useful for measuring safety and health performance for different establishment sizes. Methods: A review of the literature, and input from an expert panel, identified 95 metrics (leading, lagging, and financial)to be rated. A series of rating sessions were held in which 229 construction contractors nationwide were asked to score these metrics by assigning a number from 1 5, with a 1 for top priority or a 5 for low priority. Metrics, with high importance ratings, were identified using inter-rater agreement for small (<100), medium (100 499), and large (>= 500) establishment sizes. Results 13 unique metrics were identified based on importance, with some overlap of the metrics by establishment size. Conclusions This project demonstrates that contractors representing different establishment sizes share similar opinions about relevant metrics for tracking safety and health performance on the job.

Learning Areas:
Administration, management, leadership
Communication and informatics
Occupational health and safety
Program planning

Learning Objectives:
Describe performance indicators identified from a national sample of construction contractors. Describe rating session techniques (priorities and inter-rater agreement). Describe next steps for field testing and operationalizing conceptual indicators (leading, lagging, and financial).

Keywords: Health Management Information Systems, Construction Injuries

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: Yes, I am qualified to be an abstract author on the content because I am a collaborator on the research project.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.