So, good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to our session, What We Learned Setting Up a Successful Staff Health Risk Assessment Survey During a Pandemic. This session will be presented by the team from Health and Safety Directorate in the World Bank Group. And I will start. I'm Jasmina Goldoni-Lestadius. I'm a Senior Occupational Health Specialist in the World Bank. And I will start with a few introductions. So, who is the World Bank Group? Who is our staff? Who is Health and Safety Directorate? And what our mission is? So, the World Bank Group is an international organization affiliated within the UN with the mission to end extreme poverty and to promote shared prosperity. So, the World Bank is the largest source of financial assistance to developing countries and has 198 member states. The World Bank is headquartered in Washington, D.C., but has a lot of country offices scattered around the world. There are about 250 country offices, mostly in low- and middle-income countries, in 140 countries, and five institutions forming the World Bank Group. Where is our staff from? Our staff is from everywhere. We have represented all nationalities on all continents. Our staff is multicultural, multilingual. It is actually very educated, typically very educated workforce. And it has, in some places, limited access to health care. Even international staff that is in developed countries sometimes have difficult access to health care due to the fact that they are not part of local medical insurances. Health and Safety Directorate is serving the staff in the bank and also in the National Monetary Fund. Health and Safety Directorate itself is a good representative of population which it serves. We are multinational. We are coming from different countries. We have different schools in our professional background. We are organized in three components. One is occupational health and safety, then personal health and wellness, and mental health and well-being. Occupational medicine physicians are concentrated in occupational health and safety component. Currently we have three physicians, one from New Zealand, one from South Africa, whom you will meet very soon, and me from Croatia. We had also physicians from Sweden, from France, and China. So we have a really good perspective on all these populations. And they're coming from different schools, occupational and environmental medicine. Education is not everywhere the same. Some of us are stronger in emergency medicine. Some are stronger in clinical practice. Some are stronger in epidemiology. So it makes us very competent to serve our population. In addition to occupational medicine team, we have occupational safety team and ergonomics team within occupational health and safety unit. Personal health and wellness help staff to access the health care. Also provides travel health services and health promotion. And finally, mental health and well-being. They provide individual and group counseling, psychosocial support, and also host domestic abuse prevention program. We are working together, of course, on various projects, and you will see presentation of one of them today. HSD, this is an abbreviation for health and safety directorate, has very, very difficult mission. So we are supposed to protect and promote the health and safety of staff, wherever they may be, and you saw where they are, taking account of their individual health status, working environment, and job demands. This is achieved by managing health and safety risks and offering evidence-based quality control and integrated occupational health and safety services. So this is, as I said, very hard mission, but our leadership is actually committed to it, which is expressed through documents that are basis for implementation of our program. The main document umbrella is occupational health and safety. Directive, it is a name for the policy in the organization. And also we have established occupational health and safety committee, where we have representatives of all stakeholders in the organization, because typically interventions in health and safety ask for involvement of various parts of the institution, not only health and safety directorate. This is a model that shows our approach to implementation of occupational health and safety management system. So we look into it through three dimensions. One is a general environment, then work environment, and then individual and population health. So assessing risk at all these three levels help us to be integrated and holistic in our approach, and also sometimes just defining register within three dimensions almost define the roles we have in the implementation. I will give you an example. It looks actually complicated, but it is very simple, and it could be implemented at any topic in occupational health. Let's say pandemic in terms of general environment. The virus is everywhere, so we are following epidemiological situation, especially at location where we have country offices, and this is our risk assessment where we decide whether offices will be closed or partly closed or open. We have four tierings of opening, so we monitor this based on the general environment situation. At the workplace level, we control workplace environment. This is something that we can control better, starting from cleaning and disinfecting of offices, starting from supplying masks, from having all kinds of rules about physical distances, hand washing, and so on. So this is our bubble where we have some power to control the spread of virus. And then at the individual level, we knew what is our vulnerable staff, so they would have priority in vaccination. And generally on population health level, we want everybody actually to be vaccinated, and especially again giving priority to location where pandemic is in the worst state. I could go on with air pollution, for example, where you have general environment air pollution which you monitor, where you control in workplace air quality and filter this toxic air. And then in the individual level, you don't want to send somebody with asthma to, for example, New Delhi office. Or population level, which showed the last time when we had surveyed that in New Delhi office, we have a lot of smokers. We don't want to have smokers, especially in such areas. So that's the priority for our smoking cessation program. So you can run every single topic through these three models, and it's very helpful to categorize hazards and risks that way. So in our global population, how do we assess risk at population health level? The only way we can do it is survey. We created a survey that is holistic, that is comprehensive, and that is measuring health risks and conditions across physical health, mental health, perception of health. It measures preventive screening, ergonomics, sick leave, vaccine hesitancy, knowing of biometric basic factors, and so on. So this is our tool that we used already in 2014 as a baseline, and we were ready to repeat it before pandemic, but then pandemic hit. Pandemic, the pandemic changed the world, and we realized that we have to also reconsider our practices. We have to understand what happened, and this is where we launched our second survey, staff health and safety risk assessment, to measure all these basic levels that we measured already previously, but adding experience, COVID experience. So we asked our staff, did you have COVID? How severe? How have you been treated? Have you been vaccinated? When you would be ready to come back to the offices, to come back to the travel? So we got not only the picture of what happened at that moment with our staff regarding pandemic, but we also got information about future work, what people actually, how they experienced home-based work, and what they would want in the future. So definitely we collected a lot of information to not only understand the damage in physical and mental health that happened during pandemic, but that informs our future program to restart important program and to introduce new ones. The survey was a big success. We reached 32% response rate, although as you can notice it was a very long survey. We were not sure how it would go, and then it was only in one language. It was only in English. So we had good coverage through banks region and were very happy that basically every third person responded to the survey. When we had baseline survey, our response rate was 21%, and now it was 32%. We see it as not only increased need to say what people need from us, but also as increased trust, because it's 10% point higher response rate in very difficult times. We collected more than 6 million data points and were analyzing them with help of John Hopkins University School of Public Health. It is just one kind of screenshot with all these tabs with parts of the surveys that were analyzed and sorted by regions, by fragility, violence status, and so on. So we consider this being a big success, and now my colleagues will tell you how we managed to achieve that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jasminka. So Jasminka made that sound very easy, right? That we just ran a survey. Actually, we had to first make a business case. I'm going to talk a little bit about how to make the business case for actually running a survey, because there were a couple of reasons why. We were concerned about the timing. We had some concerns from data privacy that I'll tell you a little bit about later. But there were a couple of reasons why we needed to make a business case originally. So the first part you want to think about is, as Jasminka said, we had 8,500 people taking the time to answer the survey, and so we needed to be appreciative of the results and really just analyze them well. So the benefits of running a survey, the first thing we wanted to demonstrate was institutional caring and make the case that, as an institution, we say our staff are the most important part of us, and we need to demonstrate that. And so giving them a safe space and a place where they can really share their concerns and their feelings was part of running that survey. And then we also wanted to understand what their priorities were, right? We can't say why 16,000 people didn't tell us what their priorities were, but for the 8,500 people who did actually answer the survey, we get a sense of where they're at and what they want. And then finally, obviously, as Jasminka said, we got 6,400,000 data points. And so if you break that down, we can use that for a number of different reasons, a number of different ways. We got a good sense of the mental and physical state of the staff. We got a sense of the sentiment of the staff, so what their perception was. Are you getting feedback from me? No? Okay. We got a sense of the perception of the staff, how they feel about health and wellness, how important it is to them, how they're engaging with health initiatives, both ours and perhaps initiatives outside the bank. We got some suggestions, right? We got to think about what was important to them and how we can inform our business process or business programs in the future. If you expand that more to a population health management lens, Jasminka showed you the slide with all the different locations, we could see trends in different locations. We could understand, you know, different countries had different priorities, for example, or different age groups have different priorities, or perhaps even different working groups have different priorities. So understanding those trends were important. We could understand the success of our interventions and then really get a sense of where to next. So using the data, the change from 2014 to 2021, to inform some policies and strategies and think about where we go next. So full transparency, I'm currently doing an MBA, and so I've started looking at things through very much a business lens. And so when we did need to make the business case, we thought we'd do a SWOT analysis. And a SWOT analysis is a very simple tool looking at the strengths and weaknesses. So we looked at our internal strengths and weaknesses. And then externally... So when I say we looked at our internal, I'm talking about within our department, within our directive, what were some of our strengths and weaknesses. And then we looked externally what are the opportunities and threats. And to give you guys an example, when we originally tried to motivate or when we were originally motivating to do the survey, as Jasminka pointed out, it was before COVID. And so when we needed to pivot, one of the strengths that we wanted to sort of highlight to managers or to our management was the importance of really letting staff feel that they were supported in health, not just in COVID. So that was one of the strengths we highlighted. So if we sort of combine these two, sort of the business case and the strengths and weaknesses, we distilled down what the strategic value of our data would be. And as you can see, this was very much during COVID. So the first two were really just to get a sense of staff's physical and mental... ..physical and mental fitness. And I'm sorry, we can't see the... Just why we're all looking that way, we can't see our slides. But to get a sense of the mental and physical fitness. And then we also wanted to inform our mental health strategy. And we're going to pipe Stuart in a little bit later. He's our head counsellor to talk a bit more about how we use data to inform our mental health strategy. And then, obviously, the last four are all related to COVID. We needed to think about how we get staff back to office, which is still an ongoing discussion, I'm sure for many of you as well. And then, you know, thinking about returning to mission travel. One of the things about the World Bank Group is we do a huge amount of travel. We have staff in 130 locations, but what that doesn't tell you is that we have a huge number of staff travelling to all those locations on mission all the time. And so really needing to get a sense of how we go back to mission travel in a safe way was important as well. So the next thing I want to talk about is thinking about a stakeholder analysis when you plan a survey. And this is one of the things that we maybe didn't do as well as we would have liked to have done in retrospect, and one of the things we'll do in future, I think, in a bit more detail. So basically a stakeholder analysis is a three-step process. You first think about everybody who has anything to do with your survey. So those could be the people working on the survey, there could be people who are interested in the survey, there could be people who have the ability to approve your survey or to sink your survey. And so really working out the stakeholders is important and we made a list of our various stakeholders there, including our survey partners. And then you need to think about what is the power or influence that each of those stakeholders have and what is their interest? And that could be positive or negative, right? You could have someone who is interested in it succeeding, you could have someone who's interested in it failing. But what you need to think about is really the influence that they're going to have. And then basically I'm advocating for using a visual approach here. You wanna map it out on a graph and then based on that you make decisions as to how you inform the people or if you just monitor that they haven't shifted their ability to influence your survey, for example. And obviously if they have high interest and they have high influence, you wanna make sure that they're kept informed and they're managed closely. So that's just thinking a little bit about the stakeholder analysis. Why this became really important for us, does anyone know what Hofstadter's Law is? No, okay. So Hofstadter's Law is a great life principle on the fact that everything will always take longer than you think it's going to take. That's Hofstadter's Law, even if you take into account Hofstadter's Law. So basically it's like standing in a funhouse looking in a mirror and you see yourself reflected a million times, right? But the principle really is that it's always gonna take longer than you think. And I have a little cautionary tale on this. As Jasminka said, our last survey had been in 2014 and we have a, I think we can all agree that there's been quite a lot of evolution in the last few years on data privacy and data security in the world, right? And so from a data privacy point of view, data privacy are the people who write the policies, who think about why you want to access data and who has access to data. So you have your data privacy team and then you have a team for data security, which are the people that make sure the data is secure and safe and not also, again, accessed by someone who shouldn't access it. So when we now went to bat to do our new survey, our data security team said to us, well, we're sorry, but the tool that you want to use for the survey isn't the right tool. It's not secure enough. So we were like, okay. So we needed to go find a new tool. So we found a new tool and that was fine, but that obviously delayed our process. And it also meant that we didn't actually have anyone internally who knew how to use the tool. So we had to get a consultant to explain to us how to use the tool and to help us use the tool. So it added a whole lot of extra time. And just when we thought we were out of the water, our data privacy team came in and said, well, why are you doing a survey anyway? Like, why do you want to know this about people? And so because we hadn't really realized the difference, we then had to sit with the data privacy team. And this is really where having a strong business case and having thought about stakeholders beforehand was useful, having had a strong business case. But we basically needed to explain to data privacy not only the value of doing a survey, but then also the value of knowing demographics. So knowing how old someone was or what gender they were is very relevant, even though it's an anonymized survey. From a medical point of view, obviously, it's very relevant information. So that was a little bit of a cautionary tale for us. So this slide is really just to illustrate. And again, we're making it sound like it's difficult to do. And it's not difficult to do, but you want to work through all the processes. So these are all the different teams. They all work at different speeds. They all have different influences. And I'm just going to stop that. So again, the importance of really mapping out everybody who's involved, thinking about the dependencies. So again, the data privacy example, we needed a consent form. Now, a consent form has to be written by the data privacy team. Obviously, we can't launch the survey without a consent form. So mapping that time in for the data privacy team to write the consent form puts time into our timelines. So when you are thinking about putting together a survey, really make sure when you map out all the people involved, use a project management tool, and just make sure you understand all the group dependencies. So finally, I'm going to talk a little bit about communication around the survey as well. And this is really just a high-level observation of some of the things that are important to think about with communication. I think communication is probably the most important part other than the content and the analytics of the survey. But obviously, in order to get people to participate in the survey, you've got to have strong motivation. You've got to excite people about being a part of the survey. And so having a strong communications plan early on is really important. And this was really something that I think we were lucky to do. We were able to send an all-staff survey. For those of you who, I mean, all-staff communication, for those of you who work in big organizations, that's not an easy thing to do necessarily. We were able to, during the survey, we were actually able to put a daily reminder. So anytime anyone logged onto their computers or onto the World Bank Group server, they got a reminder, have you done the survey? Which was really useful, and we think that helped us to get our rates, our participation rates up to the rate they did. And then obviously, once you've done the survey, it's really important that you say thank you, right, to everyone who took the time, and that you also let them know what's going to happen next. And so that's also something we're going to take as the lessons learned for the next iteration of our survey. We'll make sure that we tell people what's going to happen next and give them a clear picture of what's happening. Okay, so that's just a bit about communication. So I've mostly, there we go. I've mostly spoken to the things that are around the survey and not the content and not the analytics of the survey. So I'm going to hand over to Sophia, who's going to talk to us a little bit more about those parts. Thank you, Sophia. All right, thank you. So I'll be talking a bit about our process for designing the survey, the questions, and what we thought were essential factors for successful survey design and the launch. And finally, touching a bit about what we can do with open-ended questions or qualitative answers. So with that, so with that, to start with, first of all, we adapted the survey, and by that we mean we customized it. We started with the 2014 that was mentioned before the 2014 survey, but we ended up adapting it to make sure, for several reasons. As you've heard from my two colleagues, we are operating in a very open-ended way. We're not trying to make sure that we're doing everything as my two colleagues. We operate in over 140 countries. We have over 30,000 staff with different languages. So we needed to make sure that it fit our audience, and then our organization. It aligned with organizational objectives and goals, and then our own health and safety directorate's programs and activities. So what are the ingredients, what we found out as we assessed afterwards, is that there are several of them. First is the time. It takes time to develop our own survey. That is one of the, there are pros and cons. That is one of the cons if you wanna look at it that way. When we develop our own survey, it really does take time. So be prepared for setbacks. As Karen mentioned, we had a few setbacks with IT, privacy, so having a good timeline that takes all of these into consideration is important. And collaboration, collaboration within our own survey team, whoever designing the survey questions, and internal groups we have. As you learned, we have different units within our health and safety directorate, and for example, our mental health and well-being unit had some questions that they wanted to put in the survey. So it is really important to have a good way to collaborate and move it forward. And also with the survey platform vendor, walking through what it actually means to put the survey in the platform and how it will function. It's an ongoing process, so it's good to be mindful of that as well. And finally, communication strategy. I think that has been covered by Karen very well, but thinking about it from the beginning, how will the communication strategy follow is something to keep in mind. And analysis and reporting. Yasmeen Khan mentioned that we partnered with John Hopkins, but we started partnering and working through this actually even before, so really thinking about it ahead of time as well. And expertise, it's good to have expertise in terms of designing questions, following best practices, evidence-based approaches. And report writing, which we again collaborated with John Hopkins, but we also did have a hands-on approach with working with them. And finally, making sure that we have the resources, because when you develop your own survey and you launch it and you have your own tool, it can be expensive. So it's good to plan for that. And sorry, I'm looking at that because I'm not seeing the slides here. And yeah, having the resources for communication and the survey tool as well. So let's jump into item selection and how did we come up with the different themes that we wanted to explore? And you saw the list that was presented earlier, but our process really was started by clarifying our goals. What is it that we want to achieve? And for us, it's really tied to HSD's mission is to keep staff healthy and well, wherever they may be, through a evidence-based risk management approach. That really is the overarching goal. And then thinking about what are the topics that we want to delve into? We had a 2014, but this was 2021 in the middle of a pandemic. So we had to think and really it involves thinking about what is actually happening and having a thought in mind about how we can follow some topics and measure changes over time. And again, clarifying our objectives. And then drafting survey questions. Once we have drafted the survey questions, we wanted to make sure and have them tested. So we had some colleagues who were actually testing the survey questions and coming back with suggestions. And that was the pilot test phase. We adjust the test again. So as you see, it's really an iterative process that can take quite a bit of time. So in terms of designing survey questions, we covered the first part, which was an iterative process. And one thing I didn't mention in the last slide is really to think about the end in mind. What is it that we want to find out? And walking backwards was something that we found was really crucial for us. And really having a purpose for each question. How are we going to analyze this question? How are we going to dissect it? And how it's going to be reported, really. And following some best practices of actually designing survey questions. And here are some of them. Making sure that the wording, that people actually are answering or reading what is the message we wanted for them to have from the question. So really being clear. And the language we use, avoiding bias. And, oops, sorry. Avoiding double-barrel questions, making sure that each question is clear and only answers one thing. And grouping of questions, putting questions that are of similar nature together and ordering just so that it's easy for the participant or the survey respondent to follow through. And what are some ingredients? We talked about the ingredients for survey design. And then we also have to think about the survey launch. How is it, what is it that we found? I think we've covered a bit of this already. But timing, timing about what was happening at that time in our organizations. If it's around, you know, there are events that were maybe happening. It may not be the best time. Vacations and, you know, there are a few things to think about in terms of timing. But it's important that the timing be correct for your organizations. And testing, making sure that once the survey is completed, that we load it into the survey platform and see how it actually functions in real time. And how is it that we're going to deliver the survey? For us, it was anonymous through a link. For other organizations, it may not be. So these are things that are important in considering when we're thinking about launching a survey. And pre-survey communication, letting staff know that this is coming, the reasons, how it's going to be analyzed or reported. And finally, having a means for monitoring responses. We were able to go into the survey tool and actually see how many people were responding and the percentage of responses. And if there is a dip, for example, perhaps it's time for another survey reminder. And making sure that there is a space where staff can go if they have any questions. And we had an email that was manned 24-7. So I want to talk a little bit about qualitative data. And these are questions that are, you know, that say other and that are tagged with quantitative questions. But we also had open-ended questions where we really wanted staff to express themselves. And one of the questions that I will talk about is was asked, do you have additional comments regarding COVID-19 pandemic experience as it relates to your home life? And the beauty of qualitative questions is that it gives participants the freedom to express themselves. And most of the time, they will actually tell us more than what the question provides. And we had for such a long survey for this one question, we had over 36% of the participants that actually responded. So it's a pretty good response for one question that asked for that. So how do we analyze it? Our approach was to, and I'll talk about the approach, but first, let me just touch upon it. The pros are, as I said, they provide rich information. The cons is it's time-consuming to really to analyze open-ended questions, something to keep in mind as you're designing the survey. But our approach has been to understand the topics that are represented. And this we did by, we had 3,500 responses. So we read and reread at least three, four times all the questions to kind of get an understanding of what it is that people are trying to tell us. What are the main topics that are emerging? And then we organized based on the themes that we saw. We coded them in terms of sentiment as positive, negative, and neutral, or mixed and neutral, I should say. And that was the portion for sentiment analysis. And we rated responses. And since this can be somewhat a subjective exercise, we had other colleagues to also look through the questions and see how well we matched in terms of rating them. And once we did all of that, we actually came up with a semi-quantitative way of actually representing that one question. So these are the subtopics that were found. And we rated them, as I said, positive, negative, neutral, and mixed. So it kind of gives you, it can be an addition to the quantitative questions along those lines but there were also some things that were not asked that that would that emerged so with that with that I was I will pass the mic on to Stuart who is joining us online while we be joining us online thank you very much good morning colleagues my name is Stuart Fisher and I am a clinical psychologist and head of the mental health and well-being unit that is one of the three core areas of the health and safety director at the World Bank to which my colleagues who are here with you today belong I apologize for being with you remotely although my reasons are legitimate we are on the cusp of the launch event for our mental health strategy later this week and as you can imagine this is somewhat of a command performance for me that I am on this panel speaks to the true multidisciplinary nature of not just our directorate but also more specifically to the collaborative effort that resulted in the health risk assessment or survey that we are discussing with you today I have been involved along with my colleagues in this process for the past eight years and further I have been connected to other internal and external stakeholders who are going to be availing themselves of the outcomes of the survey for years to come that statement is really a preview of one of the main takeaways for my portion of the discussion today collaboration of this type results in a much more applicable and impactful product that could ever be achieved via a siloed approach I also need to publicly and I'll acknowledge the impact of the efforts of my colleagues in particular as Minka whose efforts have resulted in the collection of health data from literally tens of thousands of UN family staff members this effort will have a positive ripple effect for years to come and in the vernacular is just a really big deal since I am recording this in advance and in the blessed solitude of my home office I will need to pause now and then glance around and so on since I am a one man band so to speak so please accept my apologies in advance and I will try to make this as seamless as possible I just referenced the mental health strategy that we are launching this week this has been the product of years of work that began with the UN many years ago and which is now flowing down to our institutions to take forward for implementation you can see here the goals of the strategy which are simple and straightforward but the main point I wish to emphasize here another takeaway is that this strategy and by extension the health survey must be embraced as an institutional project and not just as a health problem it is only through such institutional ownership though we will move the needle on the issues that are uncovered our primary foundational elements as you can see here are to increase the mental health literacy and awareness of our staff and also address the long-standing issues with stigma that exist not just at our institution but also throughout the world the survey plays a key role in our strategy first and foremost we have to develop an understanding of the existing psychosocial risk factors these include not just personal risk factors and negative health behaviors but also institutional risk factors that impact upon staff mental and physical health the latter includes such things as perceptions of workload locus of control and other factors second we need to track how these elements shift over time both independent of our efforts and also we hope in response to our interventions third we identified topics of specific institutional interest that we wanted to assess and we recommend that you do the same in our case the bank had established a domestic abuse prevention program two decades ago while we had no reason to believe that the incidence rate of domestic violence was any higher in our population we had nonetheless established the program in response to grassroots feedback and input many years ago yet until this year we had no definable anchor by which we could identify the self-reported incidence rate finally we saw a huge benefit in including topics that are also being investigated across the wider population of UN agencies in order to benchmark our results and thus we look to include items of interest to all organizations and harmonize the results or harmonize rather the surveys to get such data mental health figured prominently in the survey and the content of the survey reflects the value that we placed upon measuring this you can see here the main topical areas that we included and note the crossover between items that reflect both physical and mental health having to do with sleep physical activity and so on you see in front of you the rest of the main content areas none of which are necessarily novel but which encompass the solicitation of information regarding not just personal health but also institutional factors that may impact either positively or negatively upon mental health as you can see here we wanted to address stress and its impact from an evidence-based perspective thus we referenced carussic job strain model during the item development phase in order to tease out the work-related factors that staff identify as having the greatest impact upon their stress levels and overall mental health with that in mind we sought out information not just on the sources of stress but also on the sources of support that staff identified as being both available and helpful to them as well as those that were lacking finally you will see that we used items developed from the ribs in order to measure staff perception of mental health and the prevalence and impact of stigma of note a similar ribs light if you will version is also being used to collect data from the UN staff so that we will be able to anchor our results against those from our sister organizations as I hope I've covered today there are a number of takeaways some of which I've already referenced first and perhaps most obviously in our opinion good data underpins good program development and implementation second be sure to ground your item selection in good research and anchored in such a way so as to be comparable across different settings my third point and perhaps this is a bit specific to my own content area is that utilization data alone does not demonstrate the impact of any programs that you own or deliver for instance if I were to hire ten psychologists I bet I'd be able to show you ten psychologists worth of work but if you use survey data complemented by other data sources such as claims data you really do create a scenario by which you can measure impact I mentioned how important it is to be able to compare the data with that of other institutions however a main caveat for you follows from the fact that no one institution wants to be an outlier insofar as bad facts are concerned so be sure to develop a narrative and be mindful about the need to protect the privacy of not just the individuals but also the institute institutions as appropriate another point that I believe my colleagues have addressed has to do with identifying how you want to cut or stratify the data identify what correlates are meaningful or important a priori and set your parameters accordingly next be humble this is self report data and not diagnostic data and acknowledging up front both its benefits and its limitations will increase your credibility as you report the results my next point again speaks to my own content area identify how you want to leverage your data to further identify the drivers of in our instance mental health in the institution here are my three final takeaways first commit to action I can think of nothing worse than to subject your staff to a 45 minute survey and then do nothing with the results good luck getting them to do it again in the future second be transparent with the results noting that some of the data is sensitive and ought to be shielded but if your survey reveals bad facts hey you asked the question so you need to be prepared for whatever answers you get finally build this for the future you want to be able to replicate this going forward in order to see what a great job you're doing with your interventions thank you very much I will now turn back to my colleagues for their closing remarks and to take your questions should any of you have any questions for me my contact information is in my conference profile so you please don't hesitate to reach out to me send me an email or so on but please note that I'll be unlikely to be able to get back to you until probably the middle of May if not later so long thank you very much for this recording if you could put presentation back please just for final remarks sorry I have to come okay so just final few takeaways and then we will be happy to get your questions no no no here we go okay so the title was what we learned from this project and what we learned this is a real summary so value surveys are the most efficient and cost effective way to harvest data on health risk and conditions in your populations and the only way to do that in global setting there is no other source of data and there is for especially about health risks there is no medical claim saying how many hours people sleep how much they exercise what they eat so that's your way to communicate with your staff and to give them voice you cannot possibly see an interview 8500 people at the same time here in three to four weeks you get this wealth of information you get people chance to say what they need and you have chance to serve them properly power one holistic surveys survey administered regularly is far more powerful than multiple small surveys which give incomplete pictures are not comparable and cost survey fatigue so there is this fear of giving long survey thinking people will not feel it but what is the difference between 15 or 20 minutes investing your time to answer what you need or to do it in three minutes and actually get nothing so small surveys that are that are focused on small topics they are easy to feel of course but at the end you get this amount of surveys that are not comparable even with each other because you have each different set of respondents so even from the same population you you don't know what people told you at the end so not to mention that multiple small surveys they cause survey fatigue you ask people the same demographic questions over and over and then add three or four more so that's certainly not a strategy that is sustainable so think about it put all what you want to know in one big survey repeat it every two to three years and measure impact of your interventions and also gap what you still don't know strategic planning and implementation we heard about this a lot so have clear objectives think back from the end what you can actually provide after you get the survey results what what you have already in place in terms of programs what you can develop further so with this in mind ask questions and you will get your answers communication very important everybody in the organization should be involved in such survey campaigns and also they should all know their roles so so prepare everybody for what is coming and make it clear what your expectations are and what is the value of of information you are providing at the end and follow up that's what also dr. Fisher said and this is very important survey is not exercise for itself it has to be followed up by your action and you better be able to measure this action for the next time to understand whether you made a change so this time we talked about the World Bank next session after the break is about you and so you and organization implemented the same survey it's part of our success I would say so you can hear what we got at this higher level and how we implemented this further so thank you very much for your attention and now we are ready to questions and I would also like my colleagues to come up because there were some some questions in chat just to be able to in what 10 minutes address your questions online and in the room you want that so anyone from the audience do you have something okay yes please yeah we may be we may be scared you off but it depends a little bit we were building the survey on the previous one so core question baseline question we already had and on the top of that we added questions on pandemic so I collect here opinions how we would say we started let's say in October let's say and the survey was launched in March 20 March 29 so there were few months it was very intense though really this this approval from IT and data privacy and they are testing you don't know in the beginning what's following and this is why it is important to check in advance how much this brought how much time these processes can take to just design the survey that's not so terrible I mean if you focus on that in few days you have your survey but everything around it can be time-consuming so let's say so this is what three months four five five six months all in all if you have already survey tool in your organization that is approved for example that speeds up significantly we had to get approval for the survey tool so we had to get all the approvals you can imagine so it can be shorter another thing that again we will shot in the next show in the next session is when the survey is already done when you share it around within this UN organization they launched a survey like two months after we closed ours because they got it ready we they were lucky and you will have this story in our next session lucky with the survey platform so this was much faster so anyway thank you just to add as well I mean that was from time of starting to actually implementing the survey but then obviously the analytics also takes time so depending on who does the analysis for you you know and how much input you put in I mean we spent another three three months on that so so I think one of the big take-homes for us is making the decision to implement an ongoing health and safety survey you actually need to think of it and maybe two yearly cycles and and how you map it out over two years it's probably a very valuable exercise yes next time clearly it will be much easier because you know and we couldn't follow this two three years interval because pandemic just stops stopped us right there we were ready one month before everything exploded with the survey and then it was not applicable anymore so one the first effort is the longest one but then repeated efforts should be much faster well how often versus how often should be we think that two three years interval between survey is ideal we also there is there is in literature or there is another approach that you if you repeat survey annually the distance into intervention of its own because people are you know they pay attention to this same set of questions and then say well one last time really I mean now now I lost five kilos or whatever I'm doing better so people start to compete with themselves so if you if you go in that kind of way it's also fine but if you want to really measure impact of your interventions then you need a bit more than one year maybe two three years would be reasonable we have comments such a good session a nice survey okay so no more questions that we are bringing but thank you very much for your time and I hope to see some of you in the next session about survey in the UN thank you

staff health risk assessment survey

pandemic

occupational health and safety

mental health and well-being services

preventive screening

sick leave

response rate

data points

follow-up actions