EDUCATION
ASSESSING SAFETY Survey characterizes the safety culture in ACADEMIC LABORATORIES
JYLLIAN KEMSLEY, C&EN WEST COAST NEWS BUREAU
THE AMERICAN Chemical Society Divi-
teamed up with Ralph Stuart, secretary of CHAS and the University of Vermont’s environmental safety manager, to develop the survey. They were starting from scratch, Stuart notes, since, as far as anyone could tell, no survey of academic laboratory safety culture had ever been done before. Miller and Stuart wrote an initial set of questions, which were then reviewed by the CHAS executive committee as well as the ACS Committee on Chemical Safety. Miller and Stuart contacted 922 chemistry department chairs for the survey and heard back from 45.4% of the schools. Of the respondents, 81.4% were department chairs as opposed to safety committee members or chemical hygiene officers.
University of New York, Plattsburgh, and sion of Chemical Health & Safety (CHAS) one of the survey developers. “There’s an has released the results of an April survey old adage that if no one’s measuring it then aimed at evaluating the laboratory safety it isn’t important,” he adds, acknowledgculture within hundreds of academic ing that his own performance assessments chemistry departments. Intended to estabhave never included safety. lish a baseline of knowledge about laboraThe survey effort started at the August tory safety programs, the survey asked 2009 ACS national meeting in Washington, departments about administrative issues D.C. Miller attended the CHAS executive ALTHOUGH THE ANSWERS to the survey such as access to chemical hygiene plans committee meeting there and asked if the may look promising, the devil may be in the and emergency equipment, as well as traindivision would consider looking into the details. The survey responses indicate that ing and work practices of faculty, staff, and state of safety in academic departments. the vast majority of students receive safety students. “I had been thinking about all the things training, for instance. “It’s clear that trainCertain aspects of the survey make it we’ve been struggling with over the years ing is being delivered,” Stuart says. “Now difficult to obtain a clear picture of acain my own department” in terms of fosterwe need to think about how to collect demic safety culture. For example, some ing a safety-conscious environment, Miller information from the people receiving the questions refer only to “students” without says. “I was wondering how other departtraining” to evaluate whether the training specifying undergraduate or graduate, and ments were faring.” is effective. answers to other questions about chemical With the blessing of CHAS, Miller In addition to collecting answers to set hygiene plans may be influenced by questions, the survey allowed respondiffering state requirements. dents to comment on various quesSAFETY CULTURE METRICS Nevertheless, responses to some tions or aspects of the survey. The Safety training and evaluation are uneven across questions paint a relatively positive submitted comments were mixed. academic populations picture. The survey showed, for inRegarding institutional policies, a stance, that most faculty, staff, and respondent at one school noted that Faculty students receive some form of safety “the university-level safety office proNew faculty receive training. Also, 75.9% of respondents vides little guidance and oversight,” safety training before beginning lab work answered “agree” or “strongly agree” while another described a program Safety practices are when asked whether their instituinvolving surprise lab inspections. included in annual and tion’s administration supports the Regarding student safety, comments tenure evaluations development and enforcement of varied from “students are poorly Staff safety rules for laboratories. supervised” to “students are kicked New employees receive safety training before Yet 8.9% of survey respondents out” for not following safety rules. beginning lab work answered “disagree” or “strongly The survey results are available Safety practices are disagree” to that question. And the on the CHAS website (dchas.org, included in annual evaluations survey indicated that 70.5% of faculclick on “Culture Survey”). The divity, 59.2% of professional staff, 52.1% sion is also soliciting comments on Students Students receive safety of graduate students, and 20.1% of the results. That information will instruction each semester undergraduates work alone in labohelp determine the next steps. Focus before beginning lab work ratories “often” or “occasionally,” a groups are under consideration, as Graduate students receive practice that health and safety prowell as additional surveys to target safety instruction before beginning lab work fessionals generally consider unsafe. and compare the responses of stuStudents are penalized The survey also showed that safety dents and health and safety profesif they fail to follow safety rules after being trained and considerations aren’t usually includsionals. “The more feedback we get reminded of safe practices ed in the evaluation of faculty, staff, the better and more useful we can 0 20 40 60 80 100 and students. “I think that’s a bit make it for people,” Miller says. Response, % problematic in terms of the school “I’m pretty excited that the ■ Always ■ Usuallly ■ Seldom/Not at all helping to instill a culture of safety,” conversation is going on,” he adds. says Edward Miller, chair of the “Safety is a tough subject sometimes SOURCE: ACS Division of Chemical Health & Safety survey, April 2010 chemistry department at the State to get people to focus on.” ■ WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
33
JUNE 21, 2010
