A Process Evaluation of a Canadian Public Sector Employee Assistance Program

Abstract

This Canadian Public Service Employee Assistance Program (EAP) was initiated in 1990, and over the course of the past two decades since its implementation great changes have occurred in the public service and in EAP. In response a comprehensive process evaluation was conducted to determine if the current mandate, objectives, services, and processes were still meeting the needs of employees and if the EAP had the capacity to meet the future needs of the employees and organization. A mixed methods data collection approach was used in the evaluation including a comparative best practice literature review, a review of program utilization data, an online survey of employees and managers across the entire public service system, and a series of qualitative interviews with program stakeholders, members of the EAP Advisory Committee, EAP counselors, and employees who had used the program. As well a review of the current governance model and organization structure was undertaken. The evaluation data indicated that the existing EAP program was well integrated into the organization, well utilized, and generated high ratings of user satisfaction and helpfulness. Its governance structure included involvement and input from all key public sector stakeholders including the various public service unions. However, several areas for enhancement were also discovered specifically in terms of revising the EAP policy, providing 24-hour service and the need to further increase the program profile and visibility across the broad public sector. As well, it was assessed that additional resources would have to be allocated if the EAP staff were to fully address worksite education, early intervention, prevention, and wellness promotion to the extent desired by the stakeholders.

KEYWORDS:

• Canada
• Employee Assistance Program
• evaluation
• public sector

Notes

Note. EFAP = Employee and Family Assistance Program.

The alpha level of 0.01 was chosen instead of 0.05 due in part to the larger number of tests being performed and due to the fact that the large sample size for many comparisons rendered very small differences significant at alpha = .05.