The Six Characteristics of Our Safest Schools

The mission of the ESD113 Workers’ Compensation Trust is to:

Assist member districts in keeping their cost of Workers’ Compensation insurance coverage both affordable and predictable

Provide quality claims and loss control services to help prevent injuries and successfully resolve claims

Help member district’s comply with state regulations regarding employee accident prevention

Cross Reference: Board Policy ????Safety Legal References: WAC 296-24-020 re: Management’s responsibility and

WAC 296-24-040 re: Accident prevention program

 EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER WASHINGTON LAW

WAC 296-800-140Accident prevention program.

     Your responsibility: To establish, supervise and enforce an accident prevention program (APP) that is

effective in practice. (You may call this your total safety and health plan.)

ADDITIONAL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS UNDER WASHINGTON LAW

WAC 296-800-14005.     Develop, supervise, implement, and enforce safety and health training programs that are effective in practice.     WAC 296-800-14020.     Make sure your Accident Prevention Program (APP) is effective in practice.     WAC 296-800-14025.

Benchmark: SeverityIn terms of ranking (1 best/8 worst)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2008

Benchmark: Claim FrequencyIn terms of ranking (1 best/8 worst)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Average Cost per Claim

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

09/01 09/02 09/03 09/04 09/05

Fund Years

Aver

age C

ost p

er C

laim

ESD 113

Benchmark

Best-Practice

Claims per 1 Million Worker Hours

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

09/01 09/02 09/03 09/04 09/05

Policy Period

Claim

s/1 M

illion

Wor

ker H

ours

ESD 113

Benchmark

Target

ESD113 Workers’ Compensation Cost Drivers

Target(20% Better

ThanBenchmark)

ESD 113 Workers Compensation Trust

Total Direct losses are a product of the number of injuries incurred and the average cost per claim incurred. This matrix shows ESD 113 Workers Compensation Trust’s performance for the historical period 09/01/01-08/31/06

Low cost per claim, but too many accidents

sub for slide 8.ppt

Studies by the following reputable organizations concluded that

“OTHER EMPLOYER COSTS (NON-CLAIM SPECIFIC ) ARE MUCH HIGHER THAN IMMEDIATE COSTS , with a minimum 3:1 ratio”

•National Safety Council

•National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI)

•National Academy of Social Insurance

•Integrated Benefits Institute

Other Employer Costs (3 to 10 times Immediate Claims costs)

IMMEDIATE CLAIMS COSTS

Comparing ESD113 Ultimate Losses

:

ESD 113 Workers Compensation Trust performed at a level 4% lower than Benchmark over the entire historical period. Specifically, ESD 113 Workers Compensation Trust is expected to ultimately incur $533,398 less total direct losses than their composite benchmark for the historical period evaluated. By performing at a target level, ESD 113 Workers Compensation Trust could have saved an additional $5,548,000 in direct losses over the same period.

Ultimate Total Direct Losses

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

09/01 09/02 09/03 09/04 09/05

Fund Years

Losses (

in

th

ou

san

ds)

ESD 113

Benchmark

Target

Total Avg. Diff.ESD 113 $2,540 $2,850 $2,780 $3,085 $3,415 $14,670 $2,934Benchmark $2,785 $2,997 $3,103 $3,107 $3,211 $15,203 $3,041 -4%Target $1,671 $1,798 $1,862 $1,864 $1,927 $9,122 $1,824 61%

Fund Year 09/01 09/02 09/03 09/04 09/05

Total Direct Losses (in thousands)

Historical Period

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Number of Reported Accidents

Fiscal Year

ESD113 5 Year Accident History

Injury 587 526 553 575 581

Near Miss 429 438 479 475 633

9/1/2002 - 8/31/2003 9/1/2003 - 8/31/2004 9/1/2004 - 8/31/2005 9/1/2005 - 8/31/2006 9/1/2006 - 8/31/2007

Characteristic #1

Policy: District priority for safety is evidenced by each school integrating an “Accident Prevention Best Practices Model” into their school improvement planning process.  Principals communicate with all staff; by setting a high standard themselves that safety takes high priority and will be part of their school culture. With each supervisor understanding their responsibility for employee safety.

Characteristic #2

Accountability: Supervisors communicate with staff that safe working practices are expectations and not options. With each supervisor understanding their own responsibility for employee safety.

Characteristic #3

Trust: Employees are comfortable raising questions or concerns about employee safety & health. Employees feel empowered either directly or through their safety committee to affect the safety climate in their schools in a positive way. The role and importance of the safety committee is mutually understood at all levels of the organization.

Characteristic #4

Communication: A system for reporting potentially unsafe conditions or hazards is in place with a priority set on work orders addressing safety concerns.

Characteristic #5

Leadership: Supervisors take the lead in investigating all workplace accidents, communicating results with staff and in a collaborative effort identify and implement solutions that will prevent workplace injuries. Continual follow up is essential to determine the effectiveness in preventing accidents.  

Characteristic #6

Assessment: Principals have established in-house monthly safety committee meetings; safety committees are visibly and actively supported by Management. Safety committees determine staff training needs and safety training will target hazards associated with specific jobs. Supervisors make it clear to any behavioral expectations presented in the training sessions.

Thank you for Listening

Any Questions?