Confidentiality and a lack of knowledge make it tough for HR to assess EAP quality
There’s no verifying the so-called horror stories out there about employee assistance programs, but that hasn’t stopped Dave Sharar from collecting them.
Here’s one such story. An employee calls the phone number for the employee assistance program offered at his company. “He was presenting some fairly serious problems,” Sharar said, recounting what he had been told. “He was about to get a divorce. He couldn’t sleep at night. He was starting to drink too much.”
The help offered? “The person on the other end of the phone told him, ‘Go to Barnes and Noble and buy this book. Read this book and call us back and we’ll see if that has helped,’” Sharar summed up.
Sharar, managing director of Bloomington, Ill.-based EAP provider Chestnut Global Partners, has been growing concerned over the quality of service the EAP industry provides (see Sharar’s article on page 6.) Due to cost pressures, he said, some vendors are replacing resource-intensive methods of intervention with those that cost considerably less. He has seen bids for “fairly large, multi-location employers” come in at $12 US per employee per month.
“That’s abysmally low. There’s no way that, with that low of a bid, you can deliver quality product. It simply can’t be done.”
One can argue whether the trends Sharar sees are here in Canada. “We’re not far off,” said Claire Sutton, a Vancouver-based independent consultant on EAPs who believes the industry has been vastly under-priced.
Wages in the EAP sector have stayed stagnant for at least 10 years, she noted. Counsellors working on contract with EAP providers have even seen their rates dropping from $75 to $80 a decade ago to today’s $45 to $50 an hour. “They resent it. Are they going to go the extra mile? They see EAP as entry-level profession rather than a specialty. And I’ve seen too many counsellors burn out.”
In the absence of uniform standards in the industry, here and in the United States, it’s up to employers to demand quality, and employers aren’t always up to the task.
“A typical HR professional knows nothing about social services,” said University of Western Ontario associate professor Rick Csiernik, who recently completed a book on EAPs in Canada. That lack of knowledge leaves the HR department vulnerable to EAP vendors with a savvy marketing strategy, said Csiernik. HR people too often don’t know what to ask of their EAP provider to ascertain the level of service, he said.
An EAP’s confidential nature makes assessing the service even more tricky. To assess EAPs, HR departments tend to rely on two sets of numbers: utilization rates and satisfaction surveys.
But Csiernik’s research shows there are some 40 different definitions of utilization out there. And satisfaction surveys really only capture how employees feel about their counsellors, not what results the intervention delivers, said Csiernik.
“My finding is EAPs across the country are really a mixed bag.
There are some excellent programs that have mission statements, program promotion, labour-management committees in place to supervise programs and ensure regular reporting and evaluation,” said Csiernik. “Some employers spend a lot of time on EAPs. But other employers don’t spend a lot of time on EAPs.”
But not everyone is convinced that EAPs need fixing.
Rod Phillips, CEO of Toronto-based EAP provider WarrenShepell, said he disagrees with criticisms of current assessment methods.
“I disagree with the premise that client satisfaction surveys aren’t a useful way to measure levels of satisfaction with the program. And HR managers do look at anecdotal feedback or complaints about the program,” said Phillips. “I would not underestimate the capacity of good human resource managers to understand and know the value of the program in the workplace.”
Further, Phillips added, the kind of service substitution Sharar describes is characteristic of the American market. Because employers in the U.S. are the primary providers of health care, EAPs are often viewed as “a screen to prevent people from going into the more expensive components of health care,” said Phillips.
“And the EAP industry is not yet mature at this point, so the definitions of what is an EAP is fluid.”
Sutton, too, believes the industry is changing, particularly as mental health issues gain profile and help EAP providers make the case for quality intervention. But raising the bar for EAPs means the industry has to work in a concerted fashion, she added.
“It’s about marketing. It’s about selling at the top and making a difference. EAPs need to begin to demonstrate their value in dollars and cents. And they can’t do that on their own. They have to work with HR. And if employers really believe that employees are their biggest assets, then everybody has to work together here — from the top down.”
Here’s one such story. An employee calls the phone number for the employee assistance program offered at his company. “He was presenting some fairly serious problems,” Sharar said, recounting what he had been told. “He was about to get a divorce. He couldn’t sleep at night. He was starting to drink too much.”
The help offered? “The person on the other end of the phone told him, ‘Go to Barnes and Noble and buy this book. Read this book and call us back and we’ll see if that has helped,’” Sharar summed up.
Sharar, managing director of Bloomington, Ill.-based EAP provider Chestnut Global Partners, has been growing concerned over the quality of service the EAP industry provides (see Sharar’s article on page 6.) Due to cost pressures, he said, some vendors are replacing resource-intensive methods of intervention with those that cost considerably less. He has seen bids for “fairly large, multi-location employers” come in at $12 US per employee per month.
“That’s abysmally low. There’s no way that, with that low of a bid, you can deliver quality product. It simply can’t be done.”
One can argue whether the trends Sharar sees are here in Canada. “We’re not far off,” said Claire Sutton, a Vancouver-based independent consultant on EAPs who believes the industry has been vastly under-priced.
Wages in the EAP sector have stayed stagnant for at least 10 years, she noted. Counsellors working on contract with EAP providers have even seen their rates dropping from $75 to $80 a decade ago to today’s $45 to $50 an hour. “They resent it. Are they going to go the extra mile? They see EAP as entry-level profession rather than a specialty. And I’ve seen too many counsellors burn out.”
In the absence of uniform standards in the industry, here and in the United States, it’s up to employers to demand quality, and employers aren’t always up to the task.
“A typical HR professional knows nothing about social services,” said University of Western Ontario associate professor Rick Csiernik, who recently completed a book on EAPs in Canada. That lack of knowledge leaves the HR department vulnerable to EAP vendors with a savvy marketing strategy, said Csiernik. HR people too often don’t know what to ask of their EAP provider to ascertain the level of service, he said.
An EAP’s confidential nature makes assessing the service even more tricky. To assess EAPs, HR departments tend to rely on two sets of numbers: utilization rates and satisfaction surveys.
But Csiernik’s research shows there are some 40 different definitions of utilization out there. And satisfaction surveys really only capture how employees feel about their counsellors, not what results the intervention delivers, said Csiernik.
“My finding is EAPs across the country are really a mixed bag.
There are some excellent programs that have mission statements, program promotion, labour-management committees in place to supervise programs and ensure regular reporting and evaluation,” said Csiernik. “Some employers spend a lot of time on EAPs. But other employers don’t spend a lot of time on EAPs.”
But not everyone is convinced that EAPs need fixing.
Rod Phillips, CEO of Toronto-based EAP provider WarrenShepell, said he disagrees with criticisms of current assessment methods.
“I disagree with the premise that client satisfaction surveys aren’t a useful way to measure levels of satisfaction with the program. And HR managers do look at anecdotal feedback or complaints about the program,” said Phillips. “I would not underestimate the capacity of good human resource managers to understand and know the value of the program in the workplace.”
Further, Phillips added, the kind of service substitution Sharar describes is characteristic of the American market. Because employers in the U.S. are the primary providers of health care, EAPs are often viewed as “a screen to prevent people from going into the more expensive components of health care,” said Phillips.
“And the EAP industry is not yet mature at this point, so the definitions of what is an EAP is fluid.”
Sutton, too, believes the industry is changing, particularly as mental health issues gain profile and help EAP providers make the case for quality intervention. But raising the bar for EAPs means the industry has to work in a concerted fashion, she added.
“It’s about marketing. It’s about selling at the top and making a difference. EAPs need to begin to demonstrate their value in dollars and cents. And they can’t do that on their own. They have to work with HR. And if employers really believe that employees are their biggest assets, then everybody has to work together here — from the top down.”
