Formal Management Referrals Compared to Self-Referrals to Counseling from an EAP

Overview

In addition to employees seeking help for themselves or receiving referrals from family, friends, or coworkers, most comprehensive EAPs also encourage supervisors at work to refer employees who may be facing personal or work-related challenges. Supervisors play a crucial role in supporting workers, often providing informal support by talking with employees, listening to their concerns and offering emotional support. However, some situations require corrective action, like when an employee violates the company’s substance use policy or exhibits behavioral concerns that impact performance. When this happens, a formal management referral (FMR) through the EAP may be the best way to keep a valued employee on the job and productive.

Despite the long tradition of EAPs providing this specialized service, FMR clients have not received much rigorous attention from researchers in the past.

That's why we studied the health and productivity outcomes of FMR clients (which comprised 3% of the total cases) and compared this data to the outcomes of clients who used the EAP voluntarily.

For the full report, visit the International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications (IJSRP). For a summary, continue reading or fill out the form below.

Download the case summary

Executive Summary

Formal Management Referrals Compared to Self Referrals to Counseling from an External Employee Assistance Program in the United States 2017-2023 (Source: International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications [Volume 13, Issue 5, May 2023])

Sample size

41,986 employees

Summary

For this study, we gathered information from a total of 41,986 employees working at over 1,750 different employers in the United States. The study spanned seven years, starting from January 2017 until March 2023, based on the first session of program use. The data collected included the session model, duration of treatment, the employee's age, gender, the main issue they sought counseling for, referral type (whether FMR or self/other referral) and scores from several clinically validated instruments pre- and post-counseling. To quantify the true impact of an EAP and its treatment options, CuraLinc developed a proprietary assessment and follow-up process that utilizes clinically validated instruments, which CuraLinc uses for both care planning and to measure baselines and outcomes from evidence-based treatment through the program:

• Productivity Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS-6)

• Depression Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)

• Absenteeism Workplace Outcomes Suite (WOS)

• Alcohol Use Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)

• Anxiety General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7)

This report presents empirical findings from an applied real-world evaluation study conducted by CuraLinc in partnership with Dr. Mark Attridge, an expert in workplace mental health, who has authored more than 250 papers and presentations on topics in health care, psychology and communication.

Productivity

Tool used: Stanford Presenteeism Scale-6 (SPS-6)

• After counseling, the average SPS-6 score for FMR clients improved from 16.8 (moderate productivity) to 26.2 (high productivity)

• The average FMR client reported a 56% increase in productivity after counseling

• 98% of FMR clients with a productivity problem recovered to no longer have this problem

• FMR clients had significantly greater productivity improvement than self/other referral clients

Absenteeism

Tool used: The Workplace Outcome Suite (WOS)

• FMR clients missed 11.9 hours less work time after completing counseling

• 98% of FMR clients with an absenteeism problem recovered to no longer have this problem

• FMR clients had a significantly better improvement in absenteeism compared to self/other referral clients

Hours of lost productive time

Tool used: The WOS work absenteeism measure and the SPS-6 summary score (after re-coding)

• The average number of combined hours of absence and lost productivity per month for FMR clients changed from 77 hours to ~20 hours, a decrease of 56 hours per month, on average, after counseling

• For context, the typical FMR client had nearly 3 times the amount of LPT than normally experienced by most employees in general before counseling

Alcohol use

Tool used: Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)

• 83% of FMR clients with an alcohol risk recovered after counseling to no longer have a risk

• The percentage of FMR clients who were at risk for harmful alcohol use changed from 30% of clients to only 5% of clients

• The improvements in alcohol use risk were more noticeable in FMR clients than self/other referral clients because the FMR clients initially had more severe problems with work and health, particularly related to alcohol

Mental health risk

Tools used: Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) and General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7)

• The prevalence of mental health risk among FMR clients decreased significantly from 22% at the beginning (Pre) to only 3% at the end (Post)

• 82% of FMR clients who initially presented with mental health risk experienced recovery and no longer faced this risk after counseling

• FMR clients had significantly stronger relative improvement in reducing mental health risk compared to the self/other referral clients