1. Emily H. Sparer, Paul J. Catalano, Robert F. Herrick, Jack T. Dennerlein May 8, 2015 Improving Construction Site Safety Communication and Climate through a Safety Communication and Recognition Program

2. Study Rationale and Goal Lagging indicator-based safety incentive program Recognizes low injury rates Communicates the importance of reduction in injury reporting, not actual injuries (Lipscomb et al. 2013, AJIM) Leading indicator-based safety incentive program Recognizes creation and maintenance of safe working conditions Study Goal: Evaluate the efficacy of a leading indicator safety incentive program on safety conditions. 2

3. B-SAFE: Safety Communication and Recognition Program Sparer et al., 2015, New Solutions 3

4. Study Design Cluster randomized controlled trial Eight worksites (4 intervention matched w/ 4 control) ~5 months/site Pre/post exposure safety climate analysis 9-item (90-point) scale (Dedobbleleer and Beland, 1991) 4

5. Study Sample (n=615) Response rate: 74% Male (97%) White (83%) Union members (98%) Mean age: 42 Journeymen (61%) Mechanical trades (63%) 5

6. Mixed Effects Regression Model 6 Model Other variables included in model Effect estimate N Standard error P-value Model 1 – Unadjusted --1.98 604 1.370.15 Model 2 – Adjusted Worksite pair2.066040.850.016 Model 3 – Adjusted Worksite pair Worker trade Title Race/ethnicity Month started on- site Total of time on-site 2.296000.910.012 Primary independent variable: treatment effect (control/intervention) Dependent variable: change in pre- and post- B-SAFE exposure safety climate Random effect: site variable

7. Study Conclusions Programs that engage all workers by recognizing safe working conditions and strong communication offer an alternative to controversial lagging indicator-based programs Simple programs that build upon existing site programs and policies can have a positive and sustainable impact on worksite health and safety 7

8. Thank you! emily.sparer@mail.harvard.edu www.northeastern.edu/b-safe