Employee Assistance Program


Employee Assistance Program (EAP) Committee
EAP Logo




The National EAP Committee met on the morning of November 27th and with the employer for the National EAP Advisory Committee that same afternoon.

At the advisory committee meeting we were briefed on the EAP Evaluation.

After the Draft EAP Evaluation Report was received, all parties including the unions, the National EAP office, the coordinator counselors and the Program Evaluation section, had concerns with the report. All of these concerns were summarized and the report analyzed. We were all concerned that the conclusions in the report were not substantiated by quantifiable data.

The National office then asked the Evaluator to produce a final report supported by the data he collected. The evaluator was not forthcoming with producing a final report nor was he willing to produce the data from his interviews.  Because of this the National Office cancelled the contract.

Program Evaluation was approached to see what, if anything, could be done with the work produced to date. They have agreed to:

  1. Review the consultant’s report to identify any information that would be relevant in comparing the status quo and the proposed model in terms of costs and anticipated benefits.

  2. Identify any additional information that would be required to complete a comparison between the status quo and the proposed model.

  3. Discuss requirements for additional information with the National EAP office and determine whether required information can be collected by the National Office. At this point the National office would consult with the National Advisory Committee. The outcome of this would decide whether Program Evaluation Section would continue with information collection and evaluation.

  4. If it is decided to go ahead the National office would collect the information.

  5. Program Evaluation would then summarize the information on costs and anticipated benefits for the two options. There will be no quantification of benefits, only an enumeration of potential benefits. Program Evaluation will only complete the summary comparison if they have sufficient information.

We need to go through this process to justify to national senior management the direction we are taking.  The sense is that if Program Evaluation, if able to produce a report, it will be found to be more costly to go with the proposed model or Program Evaluation will be unable to complete the summary.

Respectfully submitted,

Jerry Dee, Regional Vice-President


Visit often, and send us your comments to the webmaster@ute-sei.org if you have any problems.

Copyright © 2000-2013 UTE All Rights Reserved