Section B 8.19.14

Total Worker Health for Small Business

Supporting Statement B

Request for Office of Management and Budget Review and Approval

for Federally Sponsored Data Collection

May 1, 2014

Thomas R. Cunningham, PhD

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Education and Information Dissemination Division

Robert A. Taft Laboratories

4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-10

Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

[email protected]

513-533-8325

513-533-8560 (fax)

Table of Contents

B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

1. Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods

2. Procedures for the Collection of Information

3. Methods to Maximize Response Rates and Deal with Nonresponse

4. Tests of Procedures or Methods to be Undertaken

5. Individuals Consulted on Statistical Aspects and Individuals Collecting and/or

Analyzing Data

B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

1. Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods

The respondent universe consists of the owners of the 16,469 and small business establishments with between 5 and 50 employees in the in the Greater Cincinnati Statistical Area in this study (which includes both Cincinnati, Ohio and Northern Kentucky). This location was selected for convenience purposes. Thus, a convenience sample will be used. For purposes of reaching population response saturation, this interview will be administered to a sample of approximately 60 owners of small businesses with 5 to 50 employees from the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky area (approximately 30 each in both Ohio and Kentucky). Participants will be selected through a combination of convenience sampling from chamber of commerce contact lists and referrals, as well as calls to businesses that fit the participation criteria (5 to 50 employees in the Greater Cincinnati Statistical Area) from the Dunn and Bradstreet Hoover’s database.The sample sizes are not based upon power analyses comparing expected group differences. Rather, the sample size is based upon recommendations related to qualitative interview methods, on the basis of the number of respondents needed to acquire no new response themes. The experience of the research team has shown that qualitative interview methods typically yield response saturation at the accumulation of approximately 25 respondents. Thus, the sample size of 60 is sufficient to allow for exhausting response themes in both the Ohio and Kentucky portions of the sampling area. Participants for this data collection will be recruited with the assistance of contractors who have successfully performed similar tasks for NIOSH in the past. Based upon previous data collection efforts by the research team, it is estimated approximately 90% of those contacted for recruitment will be enrolled in the study.

Data Collection Table

Number of small business establishments with 5 to 49 employees	Sample
16,469	60 participants

2. Procedures for the Collection of Information

Participants for this data collection will be recruited with the assistance of contractors who have successfully performed similar tasks for NIOSH in the past. Small business owners will be recruited from lists of business owners purchased for the contractors’ use. This study will use convenience sampling. Participants will be provided with information about the purpose of the interview and procedures for securing the study data (see Attachments C and D). In addition, they will be informed that they will be offered a token of appreciation for their time and interest in the amount of $50 for each interview they complete including time 1 and time 2 interviews for a possible total of $100, and that partial payment of the token of appreciation will be provided should they choose not to complete the interview. The contractor(s) to be used for recruitment are registered with the Federal-wide Assurance (FWA) and the Request to Allow an Outside Institution to rely on NIOSH Human Subjects Research Board (HSRB) has been filed. The interview will be administered verbally to participants in English. Interviews will be conducted by contractors with experience working with small businesses in settings familiar to the participants such as their local job site or office location. The data collection will not use electronic respondent reporting as attempting to collect the data using a computer would only increase the response time and add an additional level of discomfort for the majority of the respondents. The interviewer will read the items to the respondents and their answers will be recorded on a digital audio device. Finally, it has been the experience of the researchers that survey administrators are much more successful if they go out into the community to collect data rather than having respondents come to them.

Paper copies of the interviews and audio recordings will be kept by the NIOSH research team in a secured location with locked cabinets in offices with locked doors. The responses will also be entered into a computer program which will be kept on a password protected computer and/or on CD’s that will be stored in locked cabinet in offices with locked doors. Only the investigators will have access to the data.

Items of information to be Collected – The data will be responses to a self-report interview concerning workforce health issues such as primary hazards of concern to the owner and his/her workers, current OSH and wellness activities, perceived benefits and barriers to OSH and wellness activities, and preferred sources of information (see Attachment E). No individually identifiable information is being collected other than basic contact information; name, work phone number and email address for follow-up time 2 interview. This information will also be secured in locked cabinets and behind locked doors of the investigators.

3. Methods to Maximize Response Rates and Deal with Nonresponse

The contractor representatives who will be conducting the recruiting and scheduling of participants will be trained by NIOSH researchers regarding the purpose of the overall study and this data collection. It is expected that this training will assist them in responding to any concerns expressed by prospective participants as well as clarifying item meanings for participants completing the interview. Based on previous experience of the research team it is anticipated approximately 90% of the individuals approached will agree to participate in this study, and of those that agree to participate, virtually all will complete the entire interview. The interview will be administered once to each respondent, and there will be a follow up on time 2 in this study to collect additional perceptions after the intervention phase over a 12-month period. Research team members will retain this contact information in a secure location, for the purposes of conducting time 2 data collection. It is possible that some participants will not participate in time 2 interviews. However, NIOSH assumes that the majority of participants will participate during time 2 based on previous investigations with the target population conducted by the community organizations participating in the current project.

4. Tests of Procedures or Methods to be Undertaken

The interview instrument used by this study has been rigorously reviewed with small representative samples of the proposed target audience. These reviews insured the items were understood as intended by the researchers, that no unnecessarily redundant items were retained, and that the interview could be administered within a 90 minute period. The items themselves were derived from insights provided by subject matter experts and review of the literature.

5. Individuals Consulted on Statistical Aspects and Individuals Collecting and/or

Analyzing Data

The following individuals have been consulted regarding statistical aspects, data collection, and/or data analysis:

Review #1:

Lili Tenney, MPH

Co-director, Health Links Colorado
Center for Worker Health and Environment
Colorado School of Public Health
13199 E. Montview Ave. Suite 200
Aurora, CO 80045

Review #2:

Robin Dewey, MPH

Program Coordinator

Labor Occupational Health Program

University of California, Berkeley

Review #3:

Nico Pronk, PhD

Human Development and Health

Harvard School of Public Health

[email protected]

Review #4:

Dave DeJoy

Professor Emeritus

Workplace Health Group

Department of Health Promotion & Behavior

College of Public Health

University of Georgia