Citation
A needs assessment for a faculty/employee assistance program in the Florida State University System

Material Information

Title:
A needs assessment for a faculty/employee assistance program in the Florida State University System
Creator:
Grimes, C. Howard ( Claude Howard ), 1943-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
ix, 162 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Alcoholism ( jstor )
Educational evaluation ( jstor )
Employee assistance programs ( jstor )
Employees ( jstor )
Higher education ( jstor )
Job performance ( jstor )
Labor ( jstor )
Personnel evaluation ( jstor )
Universities ( jstor )
University administration ( jstor )
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Employee assistance programs ( lcsh )
Employees -- Counseling of ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1980.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 155-160.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by C. Howard Grimes.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
023432428 ( ALEPH )
07240161 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
















A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR
A FACULTY/EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM









BY

C. HOWARD GRIMES


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1980





























Copyright 1980

By

C. Howard Grimes































To My Parents

Howard L. and Mary Louise Grimes














ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The interest, support, guidance, and hard work of many individuals has made possible the initiation and completion of this research. They warmly deserve my greatest thanks.

My parents, to whom this work is dedicated, for giving me a love of learning.

Carolyn, my wife, who devoted many long and painstaking hours typing and retyping the manuscript, often pointing out needed improvements, and all the while being a fulltime high school counselor and mother of my two children. She has given me the fullest wifely support in my work.

Allison and Maggie, my perfect daughters, who often missed me or found me too tired, but nevertheless helped me be a father anyway.

My committee chairman, Dr. Harold C. Riker, for his patience, support, and toil. Much of what I know about quality work is due to his guidance.

Drs. E.L. Tolbert and James Wattenbarger, my doctoral

committee, for their care and concern with my work, and Drs. Tom Goodale, Larry Loesch, and John Nickens for their help and encouragement.

My boss, Dee Williams, whose understanding and encouragement were of the highest value.










Murray McLaughlin, whose idea this research area was in the first place.

Lois Rudloff, who typed the final manuscript.













TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....... ..................

ABSTRACT ......... ......................


CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION ..............
Statement of the Problem ........
Definition of Terms ... .............
Need for the Study ...........
Purpose of the Study ..........
Rationale ....... ................

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........
History of the Occupational Programs in
the United States ..........
Occupational Programs in Higher Education............ .....
Employee Assistance Programs in Higher
Education and Industry ... ........
Implementating an Occupational Program .
Beyond the Industrial Model: Theoretical
Approaches to Occupational Programs in Higher Education ... .............
Faculty Evaluation ...........
Summary ....... ..................


III PROCEDURES ..............
The Research Design ...........
Selection Process . ................
Instrumentation and Validation ....
Data Collection ..... .............
Data Analysis ..... ..............
Limitations of the Study .......

IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY .........
Analysis of the Findings .......
Findings Related to the Research Questions ...............


98 98 99
* 102
* 105
* 106
* 107

* 109
* 109

126


Page

iv

viii




1 2
12 13 15 16










CHAPTER


V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS . .
Summary ...... .................
Discussion ...............
Conclusions ...... ...............
Implications ..............
Recommendations for Further Research


APPENDICES

A NEEDS ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE .....

B STATE POLICY ON ALCOHOLISM .......


130
130 131 137 138
140


143 147


C UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE: PROCEDURES FOR
THE TREATMENT OF EMPLOYEES WHOSE USE OF
ALCOHOL AFFECTS THEIR PERFORMANCE . . . . 150


REFERENCES ........ .................... 155

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... ............... 161


vii


Page








Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR A FACULTY/EMPLOYEE
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

By

C. Howard Grimes

December 1980


Chairman: Harold C. Riker
Major Department: Counselor Education

According to the studies of epidemiologists and other researchers of the workplace, university faculty may be at high risk to alcoholism and other emotional/behavioral problems. Additionally, it is an assumption of this study that the university cannot adequately meet the needs of its constituencies, students and the general public, without seriously attending to the human needs of its own employees. For these reasons, a university Employee Assistance Program could be of signal benefit to the university and its employees, though no such program now exists in the Florida State University System.

An examination of the literature confirmed the benefits of Employee Assistance Programs for a number of institutions of higher education, provided a description of some of their special characteristics, and suggested that a theory for such programs in higher education lies in conceiving of universities as human development organizations. A


viii










questionnaire mailed to a random sample of faculty and administrators on three campuses of the State University System sought information on the need for such a program, some essential components, and the best approach to its implementation.

A 47% response to the questionnaire from a sample of 385 was considered very good. Respondents almost unanimously affirmed the need for a faculty-employee assistance program and the obligation of the university to implement one. They also favored program design by committee, use of outside consultants, implementation through the Board of Regents and the president's office combined, location in the president's office administratively, and major medical coverage for emotional/behavioral problems. Opinions were mixed on differentiating procedures between faculty/administrators and other employees. A substantial number thought referrals were more likely to come from supervisors and least likely to come from peers. A majority did not favor a decentralized approach with the first point of contact being in the individual's own department.

Sixty percent of the respondents were tenured; 26% were union members. Most (66%) were teaching or research faculty, the remainder being chairmen or administrators. Chairmen represented the smallest group (6%). Responses to all questions by the various categories of respondents tended to be more similar than different.













CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION



A growing crisis for Western institutions has been

their increasing bureaucratization and depersonalization. As individuals become less and less able to affect the structures that govern their lives, they become increasingly alienated and withdraw from those structures into egocentrism and narcissism. This alienation in turn threatens Western institutions, which become less and less viable even as they grow in size and power.

Since the sixties, the cutting edge of this crisis has been felt on college and university campuses. Students rebelled against their universities not only because they were visible symbols of authority and close at hand, but also because higher education accurately mirrored the depersonalization that exists in Western society as a whole. Today the debate goes on in learned journals and professional conferences and some reforms have been made, but the drift of Western society in the seventies is still clearly toward bureaucratization and the increasing isoiation of the individual (Lasch, 1977).

Many people in higher education struggle mightily to find the elements of community and to begin building it on their campus, all the while laboring to keep the proverbial










alligators of inflation-ridden budgets and political opportunists at bay. But there is one certain indicator often overlooked in attempts to renew institutions of higher education, and that is the treatment accorded the individuals who work for these institutions and depend on them for their livelihood. This is a basic assumption of this study: institutions and organizations that genuinely regard their employees well may also treat their constituencies well; those that do not cannot.



Statement of the Problem


In a definitive work on the problems of alcohol and

other problems in the workplace, Trice and Roman (1972) suggest that university employees, particularly faculty, may be most at risk where behavioral/medical problems are concerned. Low visibility of job performance, a characteristic of university faculty, implies the greatest risk, not because these individuals in the workplace are inherently more likely to develop problems, but because they are subject to fewer social controls when they do. Trice and Roman cite 12 different risk factors within four groupings. Emphasis is added to those factors thought to be more likely to be characteristic of university personnel:


1. Risks in which lack of visibility is most
prominent include occupying job positions with nebulous production goals, occupying










positions in which hours of work and schedules of output are flexible and
largely an individual option, and occupying positions which keep the employee
out of the purview of supervisors and
work associates.

2. Risks where the absence of structure
is most prominent include work addiction, work-role removal and occupational
obsolescence, and entrance into a job
position which is new to the organization.

3. The absence of social controls are (sic)
particularly prominent in job roles where drinking is a part of the work role, job
roles in which an employee's deviant
drinking or drug use actually benefits
others in the organization, and instances of mobility from a stressful job position with considerable control of deviance into an equally stressful position with few
or no controls.

4. Miscellaneous risk factors which may be
particularly relevant to drug use include role stresses which place individuals under severe strain but generally
preclude their acting to reduce the
stresses, organizational emphases on intensely competitive struggles for scarce
rewards, and the presence of illegal
drug users in the work place. (p. 102)


Although the work of Trice and Roman was limited to alcohol and drug abuse, there is every indication that the

same risk factors hold true for such other work-performance

problems as emotional, marital and family. Storm (1977)

points out what may already be surmised by logic: that in

any given employee population, some percentage will be seriously troubled by personal problems, whether medical, alcohol and drug related, emotional, marital, family, financial,










or other. Still other employees will be on the road to serious problems.

Most organizations do not have very effective procedures to deal with such employees, either for the organization's sake or the employee's. In most organizations, these employees are transferred, demoted, or even fired when their work performance begins to suffer or their performance problems can no longer be ignored, even when the organization has the best of intentions.

This situation can create far greater problems for a university than for other, less people-oriented organizations. Some of the malaise presently experienced by students may be taken as symptomatic of the university bureaucracy's inability to deal effectively with its people problems. In a speech to student personnel administrators in San Francisco in 1975, theologian Robert McAfee Brown described what he called the "new despair" among students of the seventies: a student population so impressed by the variety and immensity of current world problems that they are overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness and hopelessness. He places the responsibility for changing this atmosphere of despair into one of hope squarely on the colleges and universities and asks whether they, in fact, will simply mirror the impersonal and changeless structure of the rest of society. More pointedly, he said:










Can educational structures be humanized or not?
* * * As long as students find universities unresponsive to human needs, they will have no reason to feel that anything beyond, such as the Justice Department or the White House or
General Motors, is likely to be responsive to
human needs. (Brown, 1975, p.19)


Moreover, he raised important questions:


Will we not have to raise some fundamental
questions about the style of life of the college or university, if we expect to produce
anything but students for whom despair is the
overriding reality? . . . The enemy appears
to be depersonalization. Can our colleges and universities become places where people count
as people and not as objects? . . . If, in this
relatively manageable environment of limited
numbers in a limited space, we cannot find new
possibilities to further community, in what
ways can we expect students to create community in the infinitely more vast arenas to which they
will emigrate after graduation? (1975, p. 19)


Brown wonders whether the universities can become

"breeding grounds for hope" for their constituents, and

rhetorically asks how this could be possible while giving

lip service to the value of the "whole person." Meanwhile,

procedures become increasingly impersonal and supposedly
"value-free" policies and actions reinforce a bureaucratic

standard profile rather than accommodate the individual.

He suggests simply that it is past time for educators'

deeds to match their fine words.

Administrators must often feel at a loss on hearing

exhortative sermons such as Brown's. What is to be done?

Increase one's private virtue? Greater vigilance against









a Nixon-Watergate philosophy in the organization? Once again the simplest corrective actions prove the most elusive. While these suggestions may prove efficacious, the real remedy is more immediate and more difficult: it is careful attention to the treatment of others in the community and in the workplace especially, not only the students, but also the employees--peers, superiors, and subordinates.

The author believes that there is nowhere that this concern could prove more beneficial to both the organization and the individual--employee or constituent--than in a humane and practical policy for employees with behavioral/medical problems. It is such an obvious area of need that most organizations do evince some concern through sick leave and insurance policies with certain medical benefits. However, there are still large areas where these problems trouble both the individual and the organization seriously, and such procedures as there are tend to be inadequate, inappropriate, or even primitive (Roman, 1977a).

A number of articles in both the popular and the "trade" press have examined behavioral/medical problems in the workplace and their costs to both the organization and the individual, including such publications as Business Week, Wall Street Journal, Labor Management Alcoholism Journal, and Resident and Staff Physician. In a university, where










teaching is a major function, these problems may also be said to exist. An article on elementary and secondary teachers, by Harlin (1976), articulates the problem as it relates to teaching. Harlin describes ten areas of health concern for teachers, including the emotional or psychosomatic and systemic. The former is one of the most common reasons for teachers missing work and can have the most negative effects on students. There is a wide range, everything from moodiness to depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and alcohol and drug abuse. One New York physician says that next to colds, stomach problems are the most common complaint of teachers, often making them difficult for students and impossible to work with. In a case cited, change of employment was not necessary because the teacher sought medical advice and heeded it.

But the problem is not usually as simple as that. Alcoholism is on the rise nationwide among teachers but is often overlooked by co-workers and supervisors. Teachers fear the reactions of administrators and peers and alcohol abuse programs are rare. Harlin, Director Health Services Seattle Public Schools, and Jerrich, Executive Director American School Health Association, Founder National Center for Health and Leadership in Education, hope their study of teacher health will lead to "improved health of school personnel, inproved school environmental conditions, increased










job performance and satisfaction, and a savings of tax dollars" (1976, P. 66).

The problem might very well be put another way. Gordon, in the Chamber of Commerce publication Michigan Challenge (1973), asserts that if companies with unwritten policies on alcohol/behavioral/medical problems actually wrote those policies out, they might look something like this:


Notice to All Employees:
Do you have a drinking problem, emotional illness, or other drug dependency problem? If so,
management challenges you to outsmart us and
keep your problem concealed from management and we will pay you several thousand dollars
in group hospitalization, sick leave, and other
fringe benefits. If you should fail, however,
and we learn about your condition, your employment may be terminated. (p. 27)


Rule of thumb figures on the extent of the "troubled employee" problem often are estimated as 10% of a given work force, about 5% troubled with alcoholism and 5% with other problems--emotional, medical, financial, marital and so on (Storm, 1977). Although these figures connote the seriousness of the problem, and some organizational experiences bear them out, they are probably a bit inflated. Roman (1978) says that a survey of top executives in companies both with and without programs to deal with troubled employees indicates that nearly all disagree with the rule of thumb figures, seeing the actual percentages in their organization as smaller. However, it is abundantly clear that, protestations










of defensive managers to the contrary, no organization is exempt from this problem.

Trice and Roman estimate that the problems of alcohol and drug abuse in the workplace affect between 3 and 4% of the work population, and by extension, they say most experience indicates that the frequency of other employee problems, such as emotional ones, is a comparable figure, or another 3 or 4%. The significance of these figures, however, may not be immediately apparent:


This figure might seem minute, and a problem
of such low prevalence might not appear worthy
of a management's attention. When the potential impact of any one deviant drinker is considered, however, the relevance of the problem for organizational functioning mounts rapidly.
In other words, the disruptive consequences of
deviant drinking may far exceed the cost entailed if 4% of the work force were absent or simply sat at their jobs and did practically
nothing. The very essence of a work organization is the interdependence of job performances.
Deviance by one employee may "reverberate" beyond his work station or desk, sometimes disrupting an entire organization. Thus the prevalence figures alone do not tell the full
story. (1972, p. 2)


Trice and Roman report several consequences of alcoholism or other drug abuse on job behaviors: considerably lowered efficiency (except with early amphetamine use); surprisingly low turnover; time and energy spent by deviant drinkers and their co-workers and supervisors in coverup activities; and high rates of absenteeism. On-the-job accident rates were not unusually high, however, compared










with median accident rates, probably due in part to extra

caution and the above-mentioned absentee rates.

About absenteeism among high-status workers, these

authors say that actual absenteeism may remain relatively

low, whereas "on-the-job" absenteeism is high:


A district sales manager expressed this attitude, "I had an ingrained sense of duty and it
would not be drowned in alcohol. In all my
years of work I was conscientious about being
on the job, so as badly as I would feel I would
get up, shake it off, and go to work." A university professor stated that his "abhorrence
of irresponsibility" did not leave him even
when he became fully dependent on alcohol,
while others spoke of maintaining high standards for themselves. Obviously these jobs provided opportunities for lower visibility and on-the-job absenteeism not available to
lower-status workers.

This continued presence on the job helped
convince the deviant employees that they were
still normal. A production engineer rationalized this way: "As long as you appeared at
places when you were expected to, and as long
as you did some sort of skeleton thing, pretending to do your job . . . all these things
meant that you did not have the problem you
knew you really had. . . . Somehow, it was not
getting the better of me. . . . I could go to
to work." (1972, p. 137)


The effects of deviant drinking on the job are described from several studies cited in Trice and Roman. For

example, blue collar workers tend to turn in poor work performances after benders or in late stages of alcoholism

through absenteeism and sharp declines in work efficiency.

White collar performance, however, may actually improve










through compensation, since white collar alcoholics report steady promotions through early and middle stages of alcoholism. Some of these workers did not have hard and fast work standards to be measured against, but the pattern of compensating through short-term, improved performance seems well established. Meanwhile, the promotions served to enhance the alcoholics' denial system and prevent early intervention. Of overall studies, supervisors ranked "neglecting details formerly attended to," "lower quantity of work," and "lower quality of work" as first of 44 possible job-related impairments for alcoholics, and alcoholics were rated "the worst" in performance compared to psychotics, neurotics and normals (Trice & Roman, 1972).

At the end of his San Francisco speech, Brown asserts that only when administrators' work has its own inner integrity will students learn enduring values and respond creatively. Surely a program that is designed to reach people in need of help at the same time that it improves the functioning of the organization is a creative response to solving real problems and is a strong affirmation of truly human values. Here is an opportunity, an obligation to do work with integrity: to implement a policy and a program that will effectively reach and help the troubled employees of the university and enhance the whole university community. This approach already exists and has proven most successful in a variety of settings, including higher










education. It is called an employee assistance program (EAP).



Definition of Terms


Occupational Programs

For purposes of this study, an occupational program

is defined as a managerial procedure designed to identify, confront, and refer seriously troubled employees within a work organization and to provide all employees with a means of seeking help should they so desire. The purpose of an occupational program is not only to help the individual but also to improve the functioning and output of the organization.


Employee Assistance Programs

These programs adopt the broadest possible approach

for an occupational program. They seek to reach the troubled employee through declining job performance, and also offer employees assistance before work performance is adversely affected. Some employee assistance programs (EAP) offer a strong prevention element and conduct programs of personal development.


Troubled Employee

This term refers to any member of a work organization, non-professional, professional, or managerial, who has










behavioral/medical problems of such a nature as to affect work performance adversely or which would motivate that person to seek help.



Need for the Study


In mid-1977, there were 22 occupational programs existing or being implemented in institutions of higher learning in the United States (Godwin, 1977). By mid-1978, this number had grown to 38, (UM/EAP, unpublished paper, 1978) still a very small number for the large number of colleges and universities in the country, but indicating an increase in interest. Annual conferences on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education have been held since 1975 under the sponsorship of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and, since 1976, in co-sponsorship with the University of Missouri-Columbia (UM).

NIAAA has borne a national leadership role for the development of occupational programs since the founding of its Occupational Programs Branch in 1972. Its past director, Ernest P. Noble, told an Atlanta audience of occupational programmers in 1977 that NIAAA was interested in new techniques and alternative approaches to improve occupational programs generally, but that a plateau of innovation had probably been reached, excepting one area. "What we need now . . . is the development of effective occupational










programs to cover employed people in occupations and professions in which supervision is remote or unstructured." (Southeastern Occupational Program Training Conference [SOPTC], pages unnumbered)

Godwin, chief of NIAAA's Occupational Programs Branch, says that three criteria stand out as NIAAA strives to develop the OP concept in the future: proposals should incorporate a new model or a significant modification of an old one (e.g., for a specific population); they should have a strong evaluation component; and they should emphasize strategies for early identification of troubled employees in the professions or other relatively unstructured settings. He cites NIAAA's demonstration project at the University of Missouri-Columbia as an example of a model incorporating these emphases. The results seem to indicate that the program works by the mere fact of its existence, i.e., through peer pressure and self-referrals. Focus on job performance, however, is largely abandoned, at least for faculty and administration. In an unpublished paper distributed at the 1978 Conference on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education, the UM/EAP staff confess that the problem of how to evaluate academic performance remains baffling, and they surmise that the same is true in other universities. The situation is likened to civil service systems where it is practically impossible to fire anyone and job performance criteria are elusive.










It remains, then, to promote occupational programs in higher education and to develop a performance-based program for faculty and professional/managerial staff. Not only is NIAAA interested in developing a performance-based program for universities and professionals, but the performance-based program is still the most effective and proven approach (Trice & Roman, 1972).

Occupational programs are people-oriented programs that belong especially in people-oriented organizations such as universities. They enjoy high rates of success where they are implemented, but there are special considerations in adapting them to institutions of higher education and indeed in adapting them to any local situation, such as the Florida State University System or an individual campus.



Purpose of the Study


This study attempts to build a theoretical and data

base for an employee assistance program for use in the Florida State University System (SUS). In doing so, it examines the following questions:

1. What are the elements in the literature for a theory of employee assistance programs in higher education?










2. Have faculty and administrators in the State University System encountered personal problems among

their peers that could affect work performance?

3. Do faculty and administrators in the State University System perceive a faculty/employee assistance program as necessary and/or desirable on their campus?

4. What are some essential components of an employee

assistance program model for the State University

System?

5. What is the best approach to implementation of an

employee assistance program in the State University System on both a local and system-wide level?

6. From the literature, what is a realistic approach

to the performance evaluation component of an employee assistance program where faculty are concerned?



Rationale


The effectiveness of occupational programs lies in a

powerful conjunction of forces that includes (1) the strong desire of individuals to keep their jobs, (2) the fact that serious personal problems nearly always become obvious in impaired work performance one way or another, (3) an organization's expectation that employees perform adequately, and










(4) the fact that confidential help is available in the right place at the right time. "Constructive confrontation," the process whereby a supervisor confronts an employee with his or her declining work performance and offers professional help before invoking disciplinary action, is the heart of an occupational program. Trice and Roman call it "one of the few legitimate avenues, save police power," for an effective intervention into a deviant's life that can motivate a change in behavior (1972, p. 171).

There is no need for supervisors to become diagnosticians--that may in fact be counterproductive. What is required is simply that the supervisor be skilled in his/her basic responsibility of judging job performance and being equipped to refer employees with impaired performance. Once an organization has a clear-cut policy on behavioral/ medical problems that emphasizes early intervention and effective confrontation, and which is consistently supported on all levels of management and union, a high potential for success at prevention and rehabilitation exists in the supervisor's role. Such potential exists because it is the supervisor who has both the contact with the troubled employee and the power to take action when a change in behavior is imperative. This condition is particularly true in the employee assistance program, which places clear-cut responsibilities on supervision and offers a broad-based mental health approach to employee performance problems.









Evidence of the success of the occupational program concept is ample. For example, where success is defined as a return to satisfactory job performance and improvement in relationships with individuals or functioning in the community, E.I.duPont de Nemours & Co., with an occupational alcohol program, reports a 66% success rate with 950 alcoholics referred for treatment. Bethlehem Steel Corporation reports a 60% success rate, and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., an 80% success rate (Storm, 1977). Comparatively new programs in higher education, at the University of Missouri or Boston College, for example, report similar rates of success (see Chapter II).

In applying the OP concept to higher education, Roman (1977b) points out the necessity of recognizing the social and hierarchical realities of an organization. While one policy may be written for all employees, procedures, which are essentially what motivate an employee to use the program, should not be the same for all. Rather, procedures should be written to fit the population they are intended for--physical plant employees, say, or faculty, and training programs and referral agencies should likewise be tailored or selected for a specific employee population. The procedures must be written to fit the population or they may be unworkable.

More specifically, Roman (1978) concludes that nonacademic staff present no special problems to implementing









an employee assistance program in light of experience with program implementation in business or governmental settings. Faculty, on the other hand, have a separate administrative structure and indeed are recognized as an essentially different group from non-academic staff, and as professionals therefore require a different approach than the traditional industrial model.

If policy and procedures are to be tailored to differing groups within the organization, the best source for the initiation and implementation of those policies is not so easily determined. The Tulane Project (Roman, 1977a) studied 100 Federal civilian installations to check the effectiveness of the Federal employee alcoholism policy legislated four years earlier in 1970. The inescapable conclusion was that when a program is simply mandated from the top downward to local installations, "not much happens" (SOPTI, no. p.). Similarly, the Florida State Policy on Alcoholism (see Appendix B) is a sound and humane statement on the problem, but its application at the local level is likely to be uneven, at best.

Wattenbarger (1974), however, cites the growth of central bureaucracies at the state level in public higher education and asserts that, since that is where the power is, there is a commensurate need for leadership at that level. It is only logical to infer, then, that while










top-down program implementation may not of itself be very effective, leadership at that level is essential.

In sum, it is the assumption of this study that one of the obligations of the university is to its employees and that it cannot adequately meet the needs of its constituencies, students and general public, without seriously attending to the human needs of those employees. It is a further assumption that the OP concept is a significant and necessary step in that direction which may bring untold benefit not only to individuals but also to the university as a community and an organization. For an employee assistance program to be properly implemented in public higher education, consideration must be given to an effort at both the grassroots and the state coordinating levels. For such a program to be truly effective, a process must be found whereby the quality of faculty performance may be determined.













CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE



In this review of the literature the following topics will be considered: the history of occupational programs in the U.S., existing programs in higher education, the likenesses and differences between industrial programs and programs in higher education, implementation of a program on campus, a theory of occupational programs in higher education, and faculty evaluation as it relates to occupational programs.



History of Occupational Programs in the United States


The history of occupational programs is one of growth from a courageous albeit narrowly-defined emphasis on alcoholism to a broad program of prevention that has become a major innovation in the mental health field. James Baxter (1978) links the establishment of occupational programs to the founding of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and the Yale School of Alcohol Studies in the 1930's. The earliest programs were established at E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., and the Eastman Kodak Co. in the early forties, with Consolidated Edison and Allis-Chalmers following closely behind. In an interesting anecdote concerning Allis-Chalmers, Baxter










points out the high level of interest on the part of management because of the obvious economic advantages, and on the part of unions because of a fraternal, humanitarian concern and the desire to save jobs. Only the medical director balked at treating alcoholism as a straightforward medical problem (until the program became a clear success), an obstinacy and opportunism which Baxter says has characterized the medical profession down to the present day.

Baxter also points out that these early programs usually depended upon the fervor of a newly recovered alcoholic who wished to share his sobriety with the whole world. As such, these programs were then purely alcohol abuse programs concerned with identifying employees who exhibited a pronounced alcoholic behavior. Consequently, they were successful in reaching only late stage alcoholics whose behavior had so deteriorated that their alcoholism could no longer be concealed. Supervisors, also, trained to spot alcoholic behavior, were reluctant to tag an employee with the socially opprobrious term "alcoholic." The result was a great deal of cover-up, at least until the alcoholic had clearly passed all acceptable limits of behavior.

It was not until the sixties, when the work of Trice, Roman, and Belasco established job performance criteria as the means of identifying the troubled employee that measuring job performance alone became an accepted principle of occupational programs. Supervisors were then trained to spot not alcoholic behavior but declining job performance.









It was also at this time that Presnall and von Wiegand of the National Council on Alcoholism (NCA) described the rough measures of dollar loss from alcoholism. They reported that approximately 5% of a given work force may have alcohol problems, that this situation results in approximately a 25% salary loss for employers, and that a good occupational program will reach about 20% of these individuals in its first year of operation, achieving a 60-80% recovery rate. From these rule-of-thumb figures, a company can approximate its present alcohol dollar loss and the savings it can achieve with an occupational program (Baxter, 1978, p. 10).

The Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (PL 91-616) and the founding of NIAAA's Occupational Programs Branch in 1972 gave added impetus to occupational programs. Seeking the most effective way to prevent alcoholism, NIAAA adopted a "broad-brush" or Employee Assistance Program approach and began promoting occupational programs. But the occupational program effort is still relatively new and business and industry have not yet shown themselves ready to embrace the concept unanimously.

Most recent estimates indicate there are between one

and two thousand occupational programs in the nation (Storm, 1977). Presently active in promoting occupational programs are the following: Labor-Management Committee of NCA,










chaired by James Roche and George Meany; various programs sponsored by NIAAA, including the United Labor of Missouri program, individual grants for occupational program consultants, and the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program (UMEAP); and the Association of Labor-Management Administrators and Consultants on Alcoholism (ALMACA). In Florida, the Florida Occupational Program Connittee, Inc., (FOPC) acts as an organization of all those whose work or interests include occupational programs.



Occupational Programs in
Higher Education


Of the 38 occupational programs existing in higher education, several stand out as leading examples of effective programs by virtue of their comprehensiveness or longevity or both. Those examined here include programs at the University of Missouri, the University of Delaware, Boston College, Rutgers University, Appalachian State University, and the Rochester Institute of Technology. These programs illustrate different approaches in similar and dissimilar institutions.

University of Missouri-Columbia Employee Assistance Program (UMEAP)

The first of these programs, at the University of Missouri-Columbia, is one of the more noteworthy because it has been, since its inception in the fall of 1975, an









NIAAA-sponsored project intended as a model for occupational programs in higher education. Its director, Richard Thoreson, describes the UMEAP as "a referral resource for University employees who are having problems persistent enough to interfere with their job performance," a program using the "broad brush" approach to job performance problems such as alcohol, drugs, marital, legal, parent-child, medical, psychological. The focus is always upon deterioration of job performance as a function of persistent personal problems (1977, p. 31).

Dr. Herbert Schooling (1977) was chancellor at the University of Missouri when the program was implemented and through its first three years of operation. He cites these reasons for its implementation:

1. The university is a "high personnel utilization kind of enterprise," with about 70% of the University of Missouri's budget going for salaries and wages. That means the university is highly dependent on the quality of its personnel, and if quality suffers, the whole university will be adversely affected.

2. A university is very sensitive to public opinion, and it is people who work for the university who will determine the positive or negative tone of that opinion. How well they are perceived to perform their jobs, the services they render around the state, and their own positive feelings about their work are the determiners of public opinion.










Chancellor Schooling also delineates the elements he considers most important for the University of Missouri's EAP: it has an Advisory Committee which is interested in the program, speaks for employees, and gives it credibility; it is identified with the administration; and it is recognized as a program for all employees.

The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program includes cooperative relationships among the campus counseling center, the credit union, and academic divisions such as the law school and department of psychiatry. This program reports a total of 175 direct referrals in its first two years of operation (1975-1977), 21% of whom were professional employees or faculty and 8% of whom were dependents. The rest were hourly employees or other.

Demographic characteristics of referrals were similar to those of university personnel as a whole. Indirect or self-referrals for those two years totaled 136, over 50% of whom were faculty, exempt employees, or dependents. In addition, the 1976-1977 figures represent more than a 100% increase over the 1975-1976 figures for faculty and professional employees and nearly the same increase for hourly employees. In other words, the second year of the program provided its larger margin of growth--2.4 times for direct referrals, 1.5-1.7 for indirect.

Of the estimated 7% troubled employees on the University of Missouri campus, approximately 10% were reached the









first year and 30% the second. A follow-up on 77 EAP clients through their supervisors reports an 81% improvement of job performance within 60 days. If 15% of salary is taken as an index of deterioration of job performance (a figure commonly used and a low average of estimates by supervisors and department chairmen), the program saved $82,746 over its costs in the second year of operation (Thoresen et al., 1977).

Dr. Joseph White, Provost for Health Affairs at the University of Missouri, says of the program:


I have participated in and observed our own EAP program for the past three years. ...
As the third year of operation begins, we
can say without reservation that it has been successful in solving job-related problems of
employees in a university community.
(1978, p. 3)


University of Delaware Employee Assistance Program

The first occupational program in higher education was begun at the University of Delaware in early 1974. It is mentioned here because it was the first, because it emphasizes alcohol problems, and because it has probably the most comprehensive policy extant in terms of treatment. The Delaware program is a job performance program operated under the auspices of the Provost for faculty and the Vice President of Employee Relations for all other employees. The program policy states that employees with more than two years of service or tenure who are determined by










the University Psychiatrist and either of the two officers mentioned above to have a drinking problem affecting their work performance shall be eligible for treatment at a university-selected treatment center for 30 days on a leavewith-pay status. Employees with less than two years service or without tenure are treated on an ad hoc basis. Nothing in the EAP procedures abrogates established university policies and procedures for dismissal (Butler, 1976). The complete policy statement may be found in Appendix C.


Boston College Faculty-Staff Assistance Program

The Boston College Faculty-Staff Assistance Program

(F-SAP) was established in 1975 and is aimed mainly at faculty. It operates on a collegial model with an advisory committee consisting of representatives of each academic dean and of other identifiable constituencies such as the union and hourly employees. It presumes that the performance-referral model does not apply, but of 40% responding to a faculty survey, 76% said they would welcome intervention by the department chairman! The program is operated out of the Department of Social Work and student interns are often utilized for short-term counseling and referral.

Of 1500 employees at Boston College (525 of this number are full-time faculty), 110, approximately 8.9%, sought help through the F-SAP between March, 1975, and May, 1977. Their problems were identified as follows: 36, alcohol and









other drugs; 23, mental/physical health; 21, financial/ legal/housing; 20, family/marital; 6, work/career; 4, other (Masi, 1977).


Rutgers University Personnel Counseling Service

The University Personnel Counseling Service (UPCS) at Rutgers has the following function as defined by Ann Baxter (1977):


�. . *to attempt to identify employees whose work performance had been or was about to be negatively affected by one or more such factors (behavioral-emotional problems, alcoholism, financial difficulties), and to offer
them and/or their families services designed
to remove these factors as barriers to the employee's career effectiveness. (p. 34)


Baxter agrees with Masi that a short-term, in-house counseling program is entirely appropriate for a university Employee Assistance Program. Being on-campus, it makes the program more accessible to the employee, and university counselors are intimately acquainted with job-related problems--the second most common type at the UPCS. There is also a preventative aspect in that employees will frequently drop in just to explore whether they have a problem, often uncovering a matter that can be cleared up rather quickly. Community resources are still used for long-term counseling, but contact is maintained until the case is resolved.










Where students are concerned, however, the University Personnel Counseling Service makes a sharp break from the practice of the Boston College program. Rather than making use of interns and encouraging student participation, the University Personnel Counseling Service completely divorces itself from the student population. Counselors carry the rank of associate professor and regularly confer with medical/psychiatric consultants. This approach was adopted in response to faculty who said from the beginning that they "would not utilize the service if students were among the counselors or were utilized in any other manner whatsoever" (A. Baxter, 1977, p. 33).

Four hundred ninety-six employees have used the University Personnel Counseling Service since it opened in September, 1974. If 7% of the university population are considered at risk, the 315 cases completed successfully as of July, 1977 represent 75% of the at-risk population, including 46% bf the faculty at risk. The success rate, also 75%, compares favorably with the 60-80% success rates usually claimed for industrial programs. Appalachian State University Employee Assistance Program

Appalachian State University (ASU) has 9,000 students, 500 full-time faculty, and 800 staff, and is located in the relatively rural town of Boone, NC (pop. 12,500). From April, 1975 to July, 1977, 72 employees or dependents used










the ASU program. Twenty-five of these were faculty, 31 staff. Fourteen were faculty dependents, 2 were staff dependents. Only 18, 7 faculty and 12 staff, were supervisory referrals, the other being peer, family, or self-referrals. Fifty-six of the total 72 were referred elsewhere for further assistance. Major problems were as follows: alcohol, 22, other drugs, 2, and marital problems, 36. Al Greene (1978), the director of the program, points out that the low number of supervisory referrals is to be expected, given the nature of university programs. However, another perspective might be to note the relatively high number of "walk-in" referrals, since Trice and Roman (1972) have pointed out that supervisors are traditionally reluctant to make referrals anyway, even in industry.

Greene also notes that "perhaps the chief advantage to the university as base for an occupational program is that much of the target group is well-educated and committed to personal and professional growth" (1978, p. 45). In addition, the organization of staff along more traditional industrial lines also generates referrals, but by suppervisors.

The Appalachian State University program is located administratively and geographically on campus in the Psychological Services Center, which is the student counseling service. Counseling is free for students, but faculty and staff pay a fee based on a sliding scale after their first










visit. The faculty counseling and consultation service is provided by Greene himself, who has a one-quarter time release from teaching duties. Indeed, the whole program, from introduction to implementation to service provision, has been the work of Al Greene alone. Rochester Institute of Technology Employee Assistance Program

The Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) Employee Assistance Program is as much an in-house program as a referral program, and, like the University of Delaware Employee Assistance Program, it also is oriented toward alcohol problems. Two alcohol treatment counselors work for the program on a volunteer basis, and AA, Alanon, and Alateen groups are available on campus or are in the planning process. One faculty member from the College of Business has volunteered to help those with financial problems, and a study of student drinking habits is being conducted as part of the development of a Student Council on Alcohol. Some employees helped by the RIT program have volunteered to assist others with similar problems.

Of 51 RIT employees who contacted the Employee Assistance Program between October, 1975 and August, 1977, 49 continued employment and 2 eventually terminated voluntarily. Men and women who sought help were nearly equal in number, with about one-third of the women and threefourths of the men being supervisory referrals. About 50%










were alcohol-related problems; the other half, financial, marital and family, and emotional problems.

This sampling of existing occupational programs in higher education gives some idea of their range, diversity, and effectiveness in several kinds of institutions. The uniqueness of programs in higher education when compared with industrial programs is discussed in the following section.



Employee Assistance Programs
in Higher Education and Industry


Employee Assistance Programs in business, industry, and government have as their goal the elimination of job performance problems through early intervention on behalf of troubled employees, i.e., employees with behavioral/ medical/emotional problems such as alcoholism or marital problems. These programs are thought not only to help the troubled employee, but also to offer the organization substantial savings in lost production time and in time spent for the recruitment and training of new employees.

These programs focus on job performance as the chief means for intervention with the troubled employee. It is assumed that serious behavioral/medical/emotional difficulty will almost inevitably lead to a clear pattern of poor job performance over a period of time. Consistent and systematic monitoring of job performance by supervisors, for









all employees and over a period of time, will not fail to identify the troubled employee.

The components of an employee assistance program which make successful intervention possible are, in addition to monitoring job performance: a written policy statement explaining that the organization considers behavioral/medical/emotional problems to be like any other health problem, that employees who seek help for these problems will not be penalized in any way, and that help is available; a set of written procedures for supervisors and employees using the program; explicit labor-management cooperation in program development and operation; top level management personnel responsible for the successful operation of the program and the referral of employees to outside helping resources; orientation of supervisors and shop stewards regarding their responsibilities in the program; dissemination of information about the program to all employees; health insurance coverage for the problems the program is intended to treat or prevent; and complete confidentiality for all employees using the program (Storm, 1977).


Uniqueness of the University Setting

Several themes recur in the literature regarding the problems and advantages in introducing an employee assistance program in a university setting. Reichman (1977) delineates six major differences between industry and higher education:










1. Colleges and universities are not guided by a single, unifying purpose or group of purposes. In the words of Robert M. Hutchins, they are characterized by "aimlessness."

2. Faculty members are often evaluated more by their standing in their discipline than by their relationship to their college.

3. Colleges and universities are less hierarchical in organizational structure than business and industry. Evaluation of faculty is based more on peer bargaining than supervision.

4. There is a strong belief among academic personnel that intellectual activity is not measurable by precise standards.

5. Students--those most affected by faculty--have the least power to bring about change through faculty evaluation, or do not exercise what power they do have.

6. Faculty/administration relationships are often characterized by conflict and mistrust. Administrators are responsible for the quality of the faculty, while the faculty usually decide who gets the rewards of the institution: appointments, promotion, tenure.

Reichman summarizes what he calls these negative factors this way:


Negatives
1. Multiple purpose of college and university
2. Peer evaluation often not real evaluation









3. Faculty attachment to own discipline and
not to college
4. Impossible to evaluate faculty--no standards
5. Conflict and mistrust between faculty and
administration. (1977, p. 92)


However, there are positive elements found in higher education and not necessarily found in industry. They offer important advantages:

1. Faculty are faced with a poor job market. Mobility is sharply decreased and tenure is being questioned. Faculty must now present good evidence of their work.

2. Administrators are faced with a fairly static, aging employee population. If they want to improve their college, therefore, they must improve existing personnel. 3. Most faculty have come to think that evaluation of their performance centered around teaching, research, student advisement, and administration is perfectly acceptable. Most favor involvement of students, colleagues, and chairmen.

4. Faculty development, once limited to intra-disciplinary improvements, has a new emphasis on teaching performance. 5. There is greater recognition that a faculty member's professional work is intimately connected with his/her personal life. Professional development and quality of work may be affected positively or negatively by health, family life, or personal habits. Reichman points to an AAUP statement here:









It is not only the character of the instruction but the character of the instructor that counts.
If the student has reason to believe that the
instructor is not true to itself (sic), the education is incalculably diminished. (1977, p. 91)


6. Employee Assistance Program training can capitalize on

the diversity and self-motivation characteristic of faculty

by aiming at faculty interests, thus generating intrinsic

satisfaction and more faculty involvement.

7. Although faculty enjoy many privileges, universities

are still a bureaucracy with most of the power vested in

administrators who act as decision-makers like business

executives. They, in cooperation and a spirit of mutual

concern with faculty, will determine the nature of the

training program.

8. Unionization is encouraging the destruction of the college professor mystique and faculty are coming to accept

themselves as workers.

Reichman summarizes:


Positives
1. Faculty tied to university--poor job market
2. Administrators must deal with faculty to
improve college
3. New emphasis on faculty development apart
from specialization
4. New emphasis on faculty evaluation
5. Recognition that professional work is connected with personal life
6. Diversity and intrinsic motivation makes
for in-depth involvement in areas of interest
7. College is a bureaucracy with most power
at the top









8. Mystique of college professor is being
diluted and perception as worker taking
over. (1977, pp. 92-93)


Reichman suggests that the positives and negatives are ends of a continuum, and that it is necessary to locate a particular institution on that continuum to determine what program elements should be emphasized.

Thoresen et al. (1977) distinguishes between program elements common to all Employee Assistance Programs and those unique to universities. Those common to all programs are: 1) a basic emphasis on job performance, 2) a formal training program for supervisors, 3) a means of articulating cost effectiveness, 4) linkages with treatment resources, 5) confidentiality, 6) high-level support, and 7) a guiding committee for the program.

Program elements which are unique to a university are described by Thoresen by means of six questions:

1. Is cost effectiveness in terms of faculty and staff productivity important in a university, and if it is can it be measured?


Herein lies one of the fundamental dilemmas
found in a university setting, this being that the basic qualities of a first-rate university
simply do not lend themselves at all well to quantitative analysis. How, for example, do
we measure quantitatively the profound impact
that a fine teacher may have on the minds of several of his most promising students? How do we measure, in addition, the subtle inculcation of values that permeate teacher-student










interactions, and exert a profound, and hopefully, positive influence on the student's future contribution to society? Universities, to be charitable, are not particularly cost
effective. There is no special incentive that is built into a university's reward system for
efficient performance. (1977, p. 63)


Applied to faculty, the performance goal of adding to scholarship is vague and illusive and must be made more specific in a program for faculty.

2. Who is a supervisor? Not only are deans, department chairmen, and other officials supervisors, but many other university personnel and faculty have responsibilities for other employees. An orientation toward "good supervision" becomes critical in the training process.

3. How may the principles of academic freedom and self-direction that make for Nobel Prize winners and the monitoring of work performance be reconciled in a way that permits intervention in time of personal crisis? Here Thoresen alludes to the Trice and Roman study (1972) and notes that the very elements that encourage Nobel Prize winners--freedom and self-direction--also produce the greatest risks of deviant drinking and drug abuse in the absence of supervision and low visibility of job performance. The interaction of university environment and individual behavior suggests a developmental approach to a university program.

4. What are the typical tasks, crises, rewards of university academic personnel? Here Thoresen concludes that there










is a natural decline in performance in an aging university faculty, and that a developmental approach will distinguish between this natural trend and significant deterioration resulting from other causes.

5. Are the personal crises of alcohol abuse, divorce, and depression typical of middle-aged male faculty predominant in most universities? Epidemiological studies indicate this is indeed the case, and that there is a special, protective rationalization attached to the professions by society that prevents them from confronting these problems (Robe, 1977). Confrontation in a university setting is further prevented by a confusion between this protection and academic freedom. Thoresen concludes that education and an indirect approach generating self-referrals is the proper response.

6. What is the principal reward system for non-academic and support staff? These staff are strongly differentiated from an elite faculty by salary and relative organizational neglect. Non-academic staff must be thought of as an important part of the university ecosystem and included in program planning.

Thoresen goes on to delineate the elements unique to a university program as follows:

1) an emphasis on both remedial and developmental

components, or in other terms, both treatment

and prevention;










2) an emphasis on early intervention as secondary

prevention and threrfore on self-referrals, especially in a setting where self-development is stressed and performance is not easily measured;

3) a longer period of time allowed for implementation of a thorough program, because of the greater complexity of universities and the reluctance

of faculty to cooperate with the bureaucracy;

4) a need to respect the special characteristics

of a university, such as taking advantage of existing university resources like on-campus

counseling services or expertise;

5) an orientation training program that includes

all of these modes of prevention, i.e., not

only supervisory skills and confrontation but

also faculty and staff development. Supervision of Faculty and Administrators

Hank Riggs (Besch, et al., 1977), an associate professor in microbiology at the University of Missouri, cites several difficulties he sees in implementing an occupational program for faculty:

1. Evaluating performance is complicated by the functional separation of department chairmen or deans and their faculty--there is very little contact between the two--and the lack of specific duties in faculty contracts. Riggs calls









this situation "the biggest loophole in getting the faculty involved in an Employee Assistance Program," (p. 61) i.e., through job performance.

2. Most tenured faculty cannot be dismissed except through budgetary strictures or moral turpitude.

3. Relationships between faculty and their supervisors (chairmen or deans) are usually more colleague-friend than supervisor-employee in nature. Also, in many departments the chairmanship is rotated among the faculty.

4. Persons in the professions, especially in the medical profession, are very protective and would generally prefer to try to handle problem faculty among themselves rather than referring to a university wide program.

Wrich (1977) asserts that the differences between industry and higher education are no greater than among industries themselves or among universities themselves. For example, there is a vast difference between the University of Minnesota (40,000-50,000 students) and St. John's University (1,000 students). As another example, he points out that the University of Missouri has rotating department chairmen, but the Burlington Northern and the Soo Line railroads have crews with rotating supervisors. All three have occupational programs. Likewise, just as faculty lack welldefined job descriptions, so do many other professional positions: lawyers, researchers, and therapists. Wrich also claims that if businesses can fail because of personnel










problems, so can university departments or even universities themselves once word gets around that they are not functioning.

Roman (1978) cites measurement of job performance as a serious barrier to implementing a performance based program among faculty. Productivity and creativity in the university setting do not lend themselves to ordinal scales, and teaching effectiveness has not been measurable since goals and outcomes of teaching remain unclear. The result is that only the more obvious indicators of the most serious problems--chronic absenteeism, very bizarre behavior, and so on, signify declining performance.

Roman also describes the "guild-like" behavior of faculty as a more or less exclusive club. Separated from outsiders, there is a high tolerance and even encouragement of eccentric behavior, so that only the most extreme acts are likely to cause confrontation by a supervisor.

Belasco and Trice (1969) warn of assuming that tolerant attitudes toward mental difficulties and alcoholism increase the chances for confrontation and referral; rather the opposite is the case: less tolerant attitudes produce confrontation-related action. The evidence here is that the lower the tolerance of the supervisor for deviant behavior, the greater his willingness to confront, and consequently, the more likely the employee will receive needed help. Positive attitudes on the part of supervisors toward










deviant employees considerably diminish the likelihood of confrontation and of the employee's receiving help. The aim of effective training, then, is to diminish the tolerance of supervisors toward deviant employees.

Trice and Roman report that lack of social distance between supervisor and subordinate is probably the chief reason for the high tolerance often shown toward deviant drinking. Roman notes that studies by Trice and Beyer (1977) indicate that the greater the social distance between supervisor and employee, the greater the likelihood of confrontation with problem-drinking employees. But, of course, department chairmen are more like peers, leading Roman to conclude that


the social distance between chairpersons and
their subordinates is extremely low, that relatively weak supervision of faculty is an institutionalized part of academic life, and
that the likelihood of confrontation and crisis precipitation in such circumstances is indeed low. (1978, p. 126)


Roman also points out that two incentives to supervisory action regarding poor performers normally present in industry are absent from the university setting. These are the evaluation of the supervisor based on output and the assumption that supervisors will perform their management duties well enough to merit a promotion. Universities do not have output and production goals, and many chairmen do not desire to move higher up the administrative ladder.









Roman adds that all of these forces that work against supervisory referral also militate against peer referral, so that peer referrals also would not be a good mechanism for early identification.

Finally, universities share with industry the disadvantages of constructive confrontation in general. According to Trice and Roman, this strategy has several weaknesses; high-status employees are often nearly immune to confrontation; very low status employees may have little to lose and so the essential ingredient in provoking a crisis is missing; poor job performance may be difficult to observe and document; the "helping," rehabilitative part of the program may be passed over too quickly in favor of negative sanctions; and sometimes a crisis will provoke suicide in particularly vulnerable individuals.


Outside Resources

Not all of the factors determining the success of a

college or university Employee Assistance Program exist on the campus, or for that matter, within an industry. In their symposium on the relationship between an Employee Assistance Program and treatment services in the community, Masi et al. (1977) warn that the success or failure of these outside services can determine the success or failure of the campus program. Particular attention should be paid to the structural conditions of the outside resource and its








ability to meet the demands of changing funding sources in the future. In other words, is it managed and funded in a sound and stable manner or is it going from one crisis to another? Does it have a staff, a setting, and an approach sensitive to the particular sensitivities of university clients, or is it a product of tunnel vision, isolated in the community and unconcerned about the individual needs of its clients?

Masi and her staff at Boston College interviewed treatment resources in the Boston area to determine the best services to which to refer their clients. Their experience was that private counseling associations with a mixture of professional and para-professional personnel were their best resources. Masi includes representatives of these groups on the Faculty-Staff Assistance Program advisory board.

Another crucial issue is whether a community resource is capable of handling alcohol problems successfully and yet able to handle all the other sorts of problems people have--marital, family and financial. Many agencies do not have both capabilities.

Roman (1977b) points out a serious danger in talking

too glibly about available "community resources." Many community agencies are understaffed, underfunded, do not have experience with university personnel, do not have competent staff, and/or do not command much respect in the community. In such cases, what he calls "high status clients," i.e.,










university faculty and professionals, will simply not use these resources.

Given these potential problems, it does seem possible to be overly skeptical concerning the reliability of community resources and of taking an elitist view of university personnel. Perhaps it is enough to say that, before use, every community resource should be checked carefully as to staffing credentials, success rates, and reputation.


Prevention and Development

Gordon identifies the main thrust of an occupational program as "pre-treatment," actually divorced from treatment altogether. Although he does not use the word, "prevention" seems to be what he is talking about, and it is a concept that ought to find particularly fertile soil on the campus, even more so than in the corporation, because of the developmental nature of the university.

White cites several goals for the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program. The first is being met, in his opinion: orienting employees and supervisors as to how the program can provide assistance, and handling the particular concerns of employees, families, and supervisors. This program is also moving toward a second goal, which he describes as "preventive, health oriented."


It involves opportunities for faculty and employee enhancement not promoted as programs
for the identified troubled employee but offered










as activities available for those that look to exceed their present output, to become renewed
in their career efforts, or to heighten their
enjoyment of life. (1977, pp. 4-5)


He points out that this second goal serves to strengthen the first in that it provides troubled employees with socially acceptable reasons for seeking help.

The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program uses the term "developmental model" to embody this unique aspect of a university employee assistance program as well as those elements it has in common with industrial programs. Thoresen (1977) describes the developmental approach as the raison de'etre of the university. Building on Bauning and Kaiser's (1974) ecosystem model, this approach provides for the intersection of remediation on the one hand, and personal and institutional enrichment on the other. As a method, it provides a framework described by Brofenbrenner (1977) to deal with a hitherto ignored area of developmental psychology--the productive or middle years of one's life--an area particularly appropriate for an increasingly middle-aged faculty.

Thoresen summarizes his developmental model in this way:


(It) a) fits the unique developmental characteristics of the university, b) meets the diverse needs found in university communities, c) properly identifies the university as an
ecosystem, d) stresses primary and secondary
prevention in alcohol abuse and alcoholism, and e) fits my particular need for variety
and change along with a basic thread of continuity. (1977, p. 71)










Roman (1978) also suggests two areas where a University Employee Assistance Program might effectively work to prevent serious problems likely to develop among faculty. One is in the area of career peaking, where faculty gain tenure fairly early in their career and are left with nowhere else to go on the career ladder. This situation may actually be seen as a transition phase from tentative to full membership in the university community, during which some sort of career counseling program, perhaps involving faculty who have successfully made such a transition, could be helpful.

The second area of possible intervention is with younger faculty who are currently experiencing tremendous pressures to perform well--much more than their seniors--because of the intense competition for advancement within the organization. Counseling could conceivably relieve some of this stress and become a useful program element.

Finally, Knocke (Thornsen, et al., 1977) points out

that an Employee Assistance Program provides training benefits to the university that may be unforeseen but should not be overlooked. These include a heightened awareness of employees as a valuable resource, the importing of management and training skills through outside consultants, and a heightened awareness of supervisory responsibilities, particularly in the academic area.









Belasco and Trice (1969) have thoroughly documented

the benefits of such training from industry. Although the expected changes that particular training sessions were supposed to produce--such as an increased understanding of alcoholism--did not usually materialize, unanticipated changes did emerge: identification with the organization, a change in self-concept, and a boost in morale. Most supervisors had been appointed with no training, and the willingness of the organization to put time and effort--in phone calls, memos, and the training sessions themselves--into helping them do their job enabled them to identify with their manager status and feel a part of the organization. In other words, there was a closer identification with their supervisory role and a feeling the organization cared.

Additionally, supervisors were able to break out of their traditional isolation and form strong bonds with other supervisors whom they found experienced the same problems and frustrations they themselves did. In fact, training produced a strong sense of community in an otherwise impersonal organization, with many supervisors requesting ongoing groups for supervisors.

Reichman advises putting the Employee Assistance Program training program into the context of faculty development, much as industry does with its supervisory training programs. This kind of structuring institutionalizes the EAP within a larger university framework and offers a wide










variety of different approaches to programs and faculty interests, whether by age, interest, discipline, or career development.



Implementing an Occupational Program


Roman (1978) claims that it makes a great deal of difference how an occupational program is implemented. The method of implementation will determine the patterning of the program when it actually begins functioning. The method is in turn usually determined by the program's goals, such as reducing absenteeism and reaching alcoholics, which are implicit in the rationale for implementing the program in the first place. It follows then that the method of implementation is based on program goals and program rationale.


Six Elements of Program Implementation

Given the goals and rationale of the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program stated on pp. 25-26 and 49, Thoresen (1977) offers a blueprint for program implementation based on the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program experience. He identifies six key elements:


1. In order to have a viable program it is necessary to gain the support of high level university administration, provide maximum exposure and credibility to the program and










we believe, to maintain a constant focus on
this program as a resource of the University
that has been developed to meet the health care needs of valued University employees.
(p. 33)


Thoresen points out that a crucial factor here is the placement of the program within the university hierarchy. It was decided to place the University of Missouri program under the Office of the Provost for Health Affairs. This action served to focus on the health care of employees; placed the program in a relatively neutral conbxt politically, i.e., one level above both academic and non-academic departments; and provided maximum exposure and credibility. Other locations considered were the Personnel Office; however, the Employee Assistance Program might then be viewed as disciplinary action. Likewise, if placed in Administration, the Program might then be viewed as simply a form of fiscal and budgetary control, and if placed in the Chancellor's office, the Program might then be viewed as being for the academic faculty only, or more likely, an attempt to exercise coercive control over academic and administrative employees.

In terms of administrative control over a university program, Thoresen concludes:


Thus it would be our first suggestion that
careful attention be given to the placement
of the University Employee Assistance Program within an administrative division that
is likely to give it a voice at the upper









administrative levels, provide maximum exposure and credibility and maintain a focus
upon health care needs of university employees. (p. 34)


Thoresen offers a second important element:


2. A second element of a viable program is to establish an administrative framework that will
both provide solid high level administrative support and emphasize the preeminence of employee rights. (p. 34)


The University of Missouri approach was to develop a two-tiered system of advisory groups. One group, the Coordinating Council, was made up of dean and provost-level personnel, providing high level administrative support. The other, the Advisory Committee, was composed of all groups to be served by the program: academic and non-academic, supervisory, secretarial, and labor. The Advisory Committee oversees the day-to-day operations of the program and makes recommendations to the Coordinating Council, which in turn serves in an advisory capacity. Notice that the information flow is from the bottom up, rather than from the top down.

Thoresen et al. reiterates, "It is critical to the success of a University Employee Assistance Program to have the key university administrators view this as their program(1977, p. 35). Because the University of Missouri program is located in the Provost for Health Affairs' office, across the hall from the Chancellor's office, and the Provost sits on the










Council of Deans and the President's Cabinet, Employee Assistance Program personnel are able to meet with all major administrative groups. These groups include not only the Council of Deans and the President's Cabinet, but also the Faculty Council, the staff of the Provost for Administration, the staff of Student Affairs, the administrative staff of the School of Medicine, and Executive Committee of all the major divisions. In addition, the Chancellor is a staunch supporter, and monthly meetings with him and the Provost are held to keep them informed of progress and to request advice on important issues regarding the program, such as how and what to publicize, the policy statement, and involvement with other campuses in Kansas City, Rolla and St. Louis.


3. The third element of a viable program is
to have the project located in a building that is in close proximity to the University and in an office that includes separate and legitimate
(sic) academic functions as a part of the office activities. (p. 36)

Thoresen's concern here is for the safety and anonymity of referrals. The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program is located in a professional building adjacent to campus that also houses the credit union, physicians, dentists, attorneys, and university research projects. The title on the door is not only "University Employee Assistance Program" but also "Rehabilitation










Counselor Education Program," thus linking the Employee Assistance Program to another academic program and providing further anonymity for those who use the program.


4. The fourth element of University Employee
Assistance Program is appropriate liaison with
community mental health and drug and alcoholism agencies. (p. 37)


The University of Missouri approach here was to affiliate with the alcohol and drug referral network in the midMissouri area. In addition, university staff met with the staff of their primary referral agency, Family Counseling and Education in Alcoholism, and representatives of the Missouri Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse on the neutral ground of Division offices in Jefferson City. This procedure served the twofold purposes of keeping division representatives informed and working out the issues and problems of coordination with the primary referral agency.


5. The fifth element of a viable program is
the linkage of the University Employee Assistance Program with a community based treatment agency that has a primary focus on alcoholism education and treatment and yet has sufficient diversity of treatment goals to
handle the "broad brush" clientele of the
University Employee Assistance Program.
(pp. 37-38)

The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program felt strongly that the nature of the program excluded inhouse treatment, through the University Counseling Services,










for example, or the Department of Psychiatry or the MidMissouri Mental Health Center. This approach promotes referrals from a variety of sources and provides clear limits of the responsibilities of staff by disassociating them from treatment. Facilitating the use of the multiple referral network is particularly important, because it is assumed that white collar and managerial employees (such as those found in a university community) are implicitly rather than explicitly motivated, and a multiple referral network is necessary for


voluntary, low-coercive, referrals (self or
family, friend, co-worker, or supervisory induced) wherein deterioration in job performance, although it may be present does not
constitute the basis for the referral to the
University Employee Assistance Program.
(pp. 38-39)


Thoresen makes three related sub-recommendations here, all of which relate to the importance of emphasizing through publicity the formal, industrial model with non-academic staff to enhance credibility with academic faculty and managers. Also through publicity, the staff should encourage self and peer referrals. Public information activity builds upon the intrinsic motivation necessary for self-referrals and increases the awareness required for peer referrals.


6. The sixth element to a viable program is to build upon the unique characteristics of a
university community. (p. 39)










Thoresen notes that everyone involved, personnel, administration, and the union, would like to control the program. "The trick is to enable participation by all and control by none" (1977, p. 40).

Program evaluation includes goals, objectives, and concrete programmatic ideas that may be useful for other institutions of higher education. The evaluation is also designed to provide suitable thesis or other research projects for students, again taking advantage of the unique characteristics of the academic community.

The structure and procedures of the program, then,

are particularly keyed to the academic community, by means of "1) the multiple referral system, 2) the two-tiered system of governance of the project, 3) the low-key project publicity, and 4) the program evaluation model"' (1977, p. 41).

In summary, Thoresen contends that an Employee Assistance Program can be made to work on any university campus. It only requires an elaboration over the traditional, univariate industrial model depending mainly on supervisory referrals to a multivariate system that offers multiple points of entry by the different constituent groups. And, as with any successful program, it requires a


well thought-out plan of action and a willingness on the part of the project staff to face the controversy that regularly and inevitably
goes with any program that does something. (1976,
p. 41)










Program Implementation at Boston College

Dale Masi (1978), director of the Boston College program, has pointed out a number of factors which must be considered in implementing a program on campus:

1) The proper designation of the program is vital. Boston College President J. Donald Moran, S.J., observed that faculty do not usually see themselves as employees; accordingly, he suggested "Faculty-Staff Assistance Program". An additional problem involves the work, "assistance". Some staff were concerned over the association of "assistance" with welfare.

2) Faculty should be emphasized from the beginning. Masi's strategy here was to win over faculty first, then other staff, thinking that the reverse would not be likely to occur. Interestingly, junior faculty were certain that it would be senior faculty who used the program because they had the security of tenure, and senior faculty were convinced it would be junior faculty because they had the most problems. Apparently both were right, and recently there has been an increase in use by junior and senior faculty and their families.

3) An Advisory Committee on the Collegial Model is a necessity. The Boston College program staff recruited one faculty memger from each college plus representatives from the personnel office, the unions, the affirmative action office, and clerical and custodial staffs to form a










guiding committee which has met monthly for three years. Although at first reluctant participants, after constructing and sending a questionnaire around campus to determine need, they have become the program's chief advocates. Masi strongly recommends such a committee.

4) A faculty questionnaire is a good beginning. The Boston College questionnaire provided concrete evidence of the need for the campus Employee Assistance Program. It also strengthened committee members' commitment, as a result of responses to such questions as the following:


(Is there) a basic need for an Employee Assistance Program? Is alcohol abuse or other
mental health matters a real problem? If
the service were available, would people use it? Lastly, should it be strictly voluntary or used as a referral in cases where work performance has declined? (1978, p. 22)


Masi elaborates on this questionnaire and its results. Direct questions were avoided, she notes, since they might elicit misleading answers. Instead, faculty were asked to rate the extent to which they thought various problems might affect job performance. Significantly, alcohol and mental health problems received moderate ratings from younger respondents, with the higher ratings coming from faculty with more seniority. Also, faculty were given a case history and asked to react to various options. Ninety-eight percent rejected the option of non-involvement, implying endorsement of some sort of referral process. Seventy-six










percent approved involvement by the department chairperson; fifty percent, by a colleague.

The rate of return for the questionnaire was high-40% responded. In addition to providing answers for the committee, the questionnaire was also used to inform faculty indirectly of how the program might be used, to educate them on the signs of poor job performance, and to suggest the beneficial effects of an Employee Assistance Program. In addition, it generated the beginnings of an oncampus helping network among faculty on the committee.

5) Self-referrals should be emphasized and all types of employee problems given equal weight in program publicity. Masi claims the supervisory referral model will not work with faculty. But, she asserts, "faculty are highly motivated persons. They are achievers and want to succeed. As a result, they are used to seeking help and often will come in and ask for assistance" (1978,p.26). Alcohol problems can be spotted by skilled counselors, and Masi uses what she calls "education sessions" with groups around campus to discuss the program and views on alcohol and other drugs.

6) Faculty and staff should be offered the same benefits offered to students: a comprehensive campus counseling program, so that the Employee Assistance Program is not just a "refer-out" program.










Program Implementation at Rutgers

Ann K. Baxter, Director of the Personnel Counseling Service at Rutgers, agrees with Masi that the name for a university Employee Assistance Program is important. In her view, faculty see themselves as members of an academic community, with its own collegial structure entirely separate from the personnel office. "Assistance" also had the connotation of "financial aid" that it did for Masi's staff. Consequently, the Rutgers program staff avoided those words altogether in the program's name, the University Personnel Counseling Service (UPCS).

Problems which faced the UPCS included the following:

(1) utilization, insuring that faculty as well as non-academic staff would use the program; (2) training, setting up an effective training system for supervisors; and (3) confidentiality, making sure that the program was strictly confidential and perceived in that way.

One way UPCS resolved the utilization problem was to

give careful attention to where the program was located organizationally, i.e., "out of the political arena and not subordinated to academic, research, or training concerns" (1978, p.35).Political neutrality was achieved by placing the service under the Vice President for University Personnel, where









the Service operates autonomously in respect
to all personnel, as well as academic, aspects
of the University, both functionally and geographically. As Director, I am accountable
to the Vice President for University Personnel
only in matters of fiscal and statistical reporting. (Baxter, 1978, p. 35)


In addition to careful placement within the organization, it was thought that


Unlike many blue collar workers, many academics tend to be rather sophisticated in matters of mental health, and thus favorably inclined
toward seeking the services of mental health
professionals. This has been demonstrated in
a number of studies of health and mental health service utilization. (Proceedings, 23rd Annual Group Health Institute, Boston, MA, June 25-28,
1973. Group Health Association, Inc., p. 89)
(1978, p. 36)


Faculty, then, might more readily self-refer.

Peer referral was also thought to be a good possibility. Recognizing the conflict that many faculty might feel, however, between a wish to help a fellow faculty member on humanitarian grounds and a wish to preserve a certain reputation for their department, program staff prepared literature which presented a preventive emphasis, suggesting early intervention rather than rehabilitation.

In setting up an effective supervisory training program, UPCS rejected the "constructive coercion" of industrial programs "in favor of sessions directed toward development of self-understanding and sensitivity to problems of peers and subordinates" (Baxter, 1978, p. 37). In fact, UPCS refused to










become involved in supervisory training designed to teach people to become better supervisors in order to avoid identification of the program with other personnel functions and, therefore, less attractive to faculty members.

In order to insure and enhance confidentiality, the

University Personnel Counseling Service excluded participation by students, refused to set up an advisory board, and sought out a separate physical location from Personnel operations. UPCS was also aware that it was dealing with a population some of whose members were extremely litigious and would not hesitate to sue if they thought their privacy had been violated. Even so, their present evaluation of the matter is that they underestimated their clients' desire for privacy, since there are many requests for afterhours appointments.

Baxter found the use of the questionnaire at Boston College to be an excellent strategy but pointed out that Rutgers was so large as to make that approach impractical and cost-prohibitive on its campus. The size factor (about 10,000 employees) also deterred the University Personnel Counseling Service from employing the Advisory Committee approach. In addition to the problem of size and the concern for confidentiality mentioned above, it was feared that such a committee might too easily become politicized and factionalized. UPCS relied instead on the competency of its own staff to develop the service and on the Vice









President for University Personnel, a cabinet-level officer, as the program's sole advocate. Since the beginning of the program in September, 1974, UPCS has found an advisory committee to be unnecessary.


Other Considerations in Program Implementation

The Rutgers program is unique in eschewing an advisory committee. It differs not only from the University of Missouri and the Boston College Programs, but also from the program at the Rochester Institute of Technology, where key implementation strategy was based on a committee. The original RIT planning committee, consisting of representatives from the departments of Personnel, Social Work, Campus Services, Communications Services, and the Counseling Center, became a standing advisory committee after the implementation of the RIT Employee Assistance Program. Its purpose is to develop and disseminate educational materials about the program, work with community agencies and develop procedures for referral, and recommend needed changes for the improvement of the program. Because of confidentiality, it is not involved with individual cases, but rather concerns itself with policy and procedure.

In making general suggestions for beginning a campus program, Wrich (1977) reiterates much of what has been mentioned already. He warns again against overestimating the capability of community resources and advises looking carefully










at what they can really do as opposed to what they say they can do. Above all, Wrich recommends forming a committee of concern with broad representation from all levels of the organization, and working through the processes already established within the organization. Only in this way, says Wrich, can the concensus necessary for the success of the program be achieved.

Wrich also advises giving careful attention to the selection and location, organizationally and geographically, of program staff, and setting limits to the program, avoiding oversell. In addition to teaching supervisors what can be done when someone has a personal problem, Wrich advocates involving family members who can often have a greater impact on individuals than supervisors, especially if they are a part of the problem.


The Role of Organized Labor

Another consideration in implementing an Employee Assistance Program is the absolute necessity for full participation and cooperation of any organized labor groups within the organization. Gordon says, "An agreement between labor and management, in a completely coordinated effort to achieve mutual objectives, is vital to the success of this type of program approach" (1973, p. 28).

Concerning unions, Trice and Roman assert flatly:

An established fact of industrial relations is
that management programs involving employee











welfare must have the full consent and cooperation of the labor union or other employee organizations if they are to be effective and
durable (Belasco et al., 1969). This is especially true of programs designed to deal with deviant drinking and drug use. Union-management cooperation and mutual support are essential in such programs when he is confronted with a deviant drinker or drug user. Indeed, the absence of union cooperation may destroy the best designed programs for the management
of deviance. (1972, p. 197)


They further point out that it is essential for union

representatives to be explicitly aware of the assumptions

and definitions of troubled employee programs. The reasoning behind these programs must be shared by both labor and

management, and there must be agreement on the benefit to

employees. A"consensus in confronting and handling such an

employee is essential for a successful program' (1972, p. 200).

In addition, there must be a true company-wide policy:


A successful program to deal with this problem
cannot be directed solely at union members or
blue-collar employees; the rules and procedures must apply to all individuals in the organization. Unions feel a justifiable reluctance to
cooperate in a program which sets guidelines for behavior which, in effect, apply only to
union members. (1972, pp. 200-201)


George Boyle (Besch, et al., 1977) Director of the Labor Education Program for organized trade unions in Missouri,

cites three reasons for union support of occupational programs:

1) the humanitarian reason that it saves jobs for

workers with problems;










2) problem employees are problems not only for the

employer but also for the union, since the union

may have to defend them, and must be concerned about the rights of other workers who might be

forced to assume extra workloads, endangered by

unsafe practices, or personally harassed by problem employees;

3) recent court decisions hold the union liable for

the completeness and competence of an employee's

defense.

An occupational program involves working conditions and discipline, clearly union bailiwicks. Union support is essential since the status of the union as a representative of the employee is involved, and opposition would mean grievances over referrals and employee reluctance to self-refer to a program the union does not support. On the other hand, shop stewards and fellow employees are usually the first to identify an employee's declining performance, enjoy a special relationship with the employee which the supervisor may not, and can advise the employee of the union's difficulty in defending him should poor performance persist. In addition, working as a team with the Employee Assistance Program, the steward and the supervisor can form a healthy alliance in other areas, rather than the all too frequent adversarial one.










Trice and Roman are optimistic about union involvement and cooperation. There are problems to be sure, centered around the political nature of top union officials and the potential for intra-union differences, especially between those in staff positions and those in line positions, or between local and regional officers.


The union is committed to the protection and aid of all its members, but typically has no
way of handling the deviant employee so his
problems can be controlled and resolved.
Recognition of the double binds produced when
union officials face a deviant employee may
possibly motivate joint union-management participation in such programs. (1972, p. 203)


In addition, citing Whyte (1969, p. 472), Trice and Roman point out that the "most thoroughly demonstrated proposition on human relations in industry" is the dual loyalty of employees to their union and to management, and of management to the union as part of the organization, as well as to themselves. These interconnecting loyalties imply the possibility of a strong grassroots support for troubled employee programs.

Trice and Roman note significantly that shared understanding between management and labor requires open channels of communication and trust on both sides: "The overall tone of cooperation between union and management in a local situation is probably an excellent predictor of success or failure in this specific endeavor" (1972, p. 203).










Nevertheless, they assert that though cooperation may be stymied on all other fronts, informal cooperation where it matters most, between stewards and front-line supervisors, is still possible because of this positive grassroots attitude, offering hope for an official policy and a program that is an eventual necessity.


The Top Executive

A final point may be reiterated concerning the implementation of an Employee Assistance Program. If union cooperation is necessary for a successful program, support of the top executive is no less so. Roman (1975) points out that support of the top executive is essential not only in initiating an occupational program, but also in sustaining it. It is management that will determine the future of a program, whether it will be sustained and expanded, and the extent to which it will become an integral, working part of the organization. Thoresen and Schooling have both said, in remarks at the 1978 Conference on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education, that without the active support and involvement of the top executive, an Employee Assistance Program simply cannot be successful.









Beyond the Industrial Model: Theoretical
Approaches to Occupational Programs in Higher Education


Occupational programming may be thought of as a forthright people-helping-people program, however true all the talk about saving money for industry and producing better quality work. Wrich (1978) implies as much when he suggests that the impact of occupational programs set up by universities is conceivably greater on the community at large than all the money the federal government can spend on its own efforts at promoting such programs. Ultimately, these programs help not only the individuals directly involved but the community as a whole by breaking down the cultural fiction of the rugged individualist and demonstrating the inter-relatedness and interdependence of us all.

The impact of a university occupational program on the community is certainly of potential value. But what about its impact upon the university? Stated another way the question might be, how does an occupational program fit with the mission and function of a university?


Impact on Environment

Wrich says that regardless of the work setting, Employee Assistance Programs are set up to help people with problems. Whether those problems are alcoholism or something else, the important thing is not what the program is called or the length of training, but whether an environment










is created that will encourage "voluntary referrals." Such an environment means a stress on elements that will create trusting relationships within the work environment; a nonpunitive program policy, complete confidentiality, absence of labels within the program, such as "alcoholism counselor" or "mental health counselor," and a wide latitude of choices for action for those who seek help.

Williamson (1975) identifies just such an approach as the chief criterion of educational effectiveness, which he calls arete, or humane development, and he adds that parents of students and other publics should expect no less. If this concept may be likened to Crookston's (1975a) "human development," which he posits as a component of the university, then two broad institutional goals follow: "the actualization of the individual--student, faculty, staff and others--and the actualization of the institution through the process of continuous renewal." (p. 372) These are precisely the goals of an occupational program within an institution of higher education.

Crookston goes on to say that it is imperative that an organization with these goals--which he calls an "actualizing organization"--become among other things, flexible. It may not be content to modify the tasks of the organization to suit the organization itself, as in a bureaucracy, but rather the tasks must flow from the organization's goals. In a masterpiece of understatement, he suggests that "Many










of the old bureaucratic assumptions about the nature of work need to be challenged" (1975a, p. 372).

The actualizing organization is not only flexible,

however. In another statement that is almost a paraphrase of Wrich, above, Crookston cites Gibb (1964) as follows:


Research tells us that other key ingredients of an actualizing organization are a climate
of acceptance and trust, an open communications system, effective data-flow linkage with other groups, and a system of control that optimizes individual freedom and creativity. (1975a, p. 371)


Crookston (1975b) also describes this approach to organization as working in the symbiotic mode. The goals of the symbiotic more are the process itself, rather than an actual product or end-point, multi-dimensional and expanding rather than linear and static. "Thus," according to Crookston, "in human development theory, the ends are also the means" (1975b, p. 49).

This theory implies that everyone is involved.


thinking of a health service for all, not just
students, a library for all, counseling for all,
life planning programs for all, organization
development, and human development for all.
The MM (Milieu Manager) must have the authority to impact all components of the campus, to have a significant role in the staff and human development of all employees. (1975bi p. 54)


One caution needs to be made about the university as

a human development organization creating a climate of trust










where those who need it will seek help. Roman (1976) warns that Employee Assistance Programs which rely heavily on self-referral are in great danger of ignoring highly stigmatic problems like alcoholism, which require a "system of identification and referral based on job performance." (p. 19) Alcoholics require a crisis precipitation before they are likely to seek help, and that comes earlier, if it comes at all, from outside the person--for example, from the work place. An argument could well be made that exclusively self-referral systems are no systems at all. This fact leads to no contradiction in a human development organization since a performance-based program assumes not only the supervisor's responsibility to the organization but also to the individual working with and under him or her.

If it is granted that the occupational program concept is particularly appropriate for the university as a human development organization, it remains to determine what form the concept will take in institutions of higher education. The more traditional industrial model has been seen to have many short-comings in such a setting, and those implementing programs in higher education have had to modify and improvise to accommodate a different setting. It is quickly admitted that problems still remain.

The precise form of occupational programming in institutions of higher education is not yet fully evolved.









However, it is hoped that this study will contribute to that evolution, and the theorists do suggest directions that seem particularly promising for programs in higher education.


Organizational Issues

Roman (1975) describes the need for a "two-track program," one that recognizes real differences between lower levels of the organization and upper or mid-levels.


Three facts . . are clear: First, referrals
will rarely be made downward in an organizational structure; second, the appropriate types of training materials and emphases for supervisory implementation of program guidelines may be different in the upper and lower levels of
the organization; third, there is considerable doubt that the same referral outlets for counseling or treatment are equally attractive or appropriate to persons at different levels in the organization, particulary in light of the
intense concerns over confidentiality that accompany a problem employee in the middle or upper level echelons of the organization. (p. 314)


He adds that specialized program strategies are necessary to include management and executives in an occupational program, but does not elaborate.

Roman (1977b) stresses careful attention to the program's placement within the university bureaucracy. As others have argued, Roman points out that placement of university Employee Assistance Program in the personnel department would be a serious mistake. Rather, he recommends placing the program in the medical school, if one exists,










or in an academic department, but at any rate in the line structure of the organization where staff tend to be of at least equal status to university faculty. The University of Missouri placement of the program in the Department of Rehabilitation Counseling is ideal in that it is in an academic department with close ties to the medical school, providing status, association with the medical model which is necessary in treating alcoholism, and clear identification with counseling through this particular department.

Roman (1978) says that the central problem of implementing an Employee Assistance Program in a university is one of the professions generally. He notes that universities share the problems of program implementation with certain other institutions dependent on professional staffs, such as hospitals and research laboratories. The sociology of the professions is not very well known, especially when professionals organize to work together or try to administer each other. Significantly, occupational programmers have had little success in attempting to implement programs in professional organizations. Once again, transplanting the traditional industrial model with its emphasis on supervisory control and quantitative evaluation into an organization where those characteristics are nearly non-existent is not adequate.

If it is known, then, what referrals will come only

from the organizational level of the program and below, but










not from above, then, where faculty are concerned, departments which are below faculty status are to be avoided, and the most logical group to run the program are faculty themselves. Likewise treatment specialists outside the institution should be of equal rank with faculty. Roman concludes that institutions with the most faculty independence provide the greatest challenge to implementing an effective program, but "if decisions regarding structure and design of programming are left to the faculty with the guidance of expert outsiders, the likelihood of effective adaptations to local conditions rises sharply" (1978, pp. 127129).

Trice and Roman provide a conceptual framework wherein a faculty program might be established. It could be called "the small company concept." In describing approaches open to small companies, Trice and Roman liken these companies to the major institutions of a service economy: hospitals, government agencies, research institutes, professional organizations, and universities. Although they do not further articulate the likeness, it becomes apparent in their description of the small company; varying numbers and levels of employees and supervision, variance in the strictness or looseness of control by a parent organization or in the control exerted by any trade organizations to which they may belong. Small companies usually do not have large internal resources, such as a










medical or personnel departments and their organization is less formal; often there is a "family" atmosphere.

This is often the case with the departments and divisions of major service institutions. Much is dependent on the personalities of those who own or manage these organizations, which in turn tend to be highly individualized. Interestingly, they conclude that, with fewer staff to screen and select new employees, the alcoholic employee may be found in equal or greater numbers than in the large corporation.

Surely this is an apt description of the university

department or college, which this writer has heard referred to as "fiefdoms" by others in higher education. Such administrative units are part of a large bureaucracy, to be sure, but in many important ways they are separate and independent, characterized by the predominating personalities of a dean, chairman, or prominent faculty member.

University departments have other similarities to

small companies. Policies, for example, that managers of small companies genuinely want carried out can be accomplished without superfluous communication or the rhetorical "lip service" to irrelevant ideals that sometimes characterizes a larger bureaucracy. Conversely, because of the personalized nature of the organization, work performance confrontation may be delayed or carried out only with great reluctance. Such conditions certainly are characteristic









of many university departments. Trice and Roman (1972) point out that this permissiveness makes it difficult for employees in small organizations to get the help they need.

Managers of these small organizations, on the other hand, are probably in the best position to coordinate the carrying out of policy with the spouses of troubled employees, because of the familial, personalized atmosphere. A manager who will not confront an employee who is also an old friend will often go to a spouse when he/she believes that employee needs help. A manager in a family-like organization, then, can often have a greater impact when a confrontation does take place.

Given the initial resistance to action on the part of supervisors of small organizational subgroups, the direct and immediate involvement of department chairmen and college deans, who act as supervisors in the university setting, becomes essential in a faculty-run program. Not coincidentally, Roman (1978) advocates the committee approach, on the basis of research by Fromkin and Sherwood (1974), which indicates that supervisors give greater support to policy when they are actually involved in its formulation, and the more involvement, the more support.


Role of a Change Agent

A university occupational program based on the small company concept fits well with Roman's requirement for a










"network of change agents" (1978, p. 122). Roman does not define exactly what he means by "change agent," but he appears to refer to an individual whose responsibility it is to alter the status quo when the needs of another individual and the effectiveness of the organization demand it.

Roman describes the development of an occupational program as a linkage of change agents, usually initiated by an external change agent and carried through with the cooperation of an internal change agent. These change agents usually then rely on supervisory training for implementation of the program. But Roman contends that reliance on training in a program with a single coordinator (usually part-time) is unworkable in a large and complex university system. Rather, "a network of change agents, linked to the original inside and outside change agents and spanning all levels and divisions of the organization, is essential for program success" (1978, p. 122).

These internal change agents are policy experts who act as consultants and referral agents within their areas of responsibility. This strategy relieves supervisors of the need of becoming experts on the whole program. It also reduces the distance between supervisors who wish to seek help and the helpers, or local change agents, since the change agents are organizationally very close to the supervisors. A readily available consultant makes it easier









for them to take action to relieve their own anxiety over what to do with a problem employee.

When change agents are part of the line structure of the organization, supervisors may better understand that use of the program is part of their job expectations. The change agent network also builds a broad-based constituency of support for the program through the change agents themselves.

In an earlier work, Roman (1977b) had suggested that a

peer referral system has the greatest potential for success. He suggests utilizing a professional organization, such as the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), as California lawyers have done with their professional association. This procedure has the advantage of permitting colleagues to deal with colleagues and minimizes involvement by university management. But faculty belong to so many diverse organizations that it is difficult to see how this approach through professional organizations would work in practice. A network of change agents, however, composed of faculty and integral to the organization and structure of the university could achieve the desired peer referral effect on the local campus level. Importance of Consultation

Crookston (1975a) identifies four skills as necessary to implement the goals of a human development organization:










teaching, training, consultation, and evaluation. In another place (1975b), he says that the strategies necessary to create an atmosphere conducive to a symbiotic community are consultation, organization development methodologies, and training programs. Although all of these roles are proper to the work of a change agent within the university, the one most appropriate for a change agent within the faculty/employee assistance program network may be consultation.

This concept seems to fit nicely with Crookston's

(1975b) description of the symbiotic community, which becomes, as it were, the heart of chief descriptor of the human development organization. In a community, power and control are vested in the membership who can use it to invent processes to achieve individual and collective goals. But community must be based on a transcendent value, one that is overeaching and held by all members, regardless of the differences of other values. Since this situation is unlikely in a large complex institution like a university, Crookston recommends focusing on the smaller, discreet communities that do exist within the institution, building these up with the goal of a related system something like a larger community of the whole. This is exactly parallel to the small company concept for an occupational program.

In describing a community mental health approach for university counseling centers (as opposed to a medical










model, treatment-oriented approach), Conyne and Clack (1975) assert that consultation is the best counseling function for a campus environment. As ffiev develop the concept:


Consultation, . . . an indirect intervention
between staff consultants and their consultees, is an enabling function to improve the work of
consultees with their own clientele or in their own organization. In this indirect manner, the
consultative process allows the consultant to
have greater impact on the community by working
through others and through relevant organizational structures. (p. 413)


All consultation entry points described by Conyne and Clack could be considered relevant for an occupational program, although two, remedial and preventive, would logically receive the most emphasis at first. In the remedial emphasis, consultation is concerned with developing solutions to present problems, e.g., faculty and staff with existing alcohol and mental or emotional problems. These problems may center on the individual or the organization. As an example of an organization-centered problem, the authors cite the case of a food service manager who has personal problems due to inadequate training procedures, a staff performance problem that may be remedied once the manager is helped to see the need for more training.










An Emphasis on Prevention and Humanizing the Workplace

The preventive emphasis is perhaps the most important, however, with its concern for developing plans, procedures, and skills that will aid in preventing future problems from occurring. This emphasis suggests the social ecology approach of Insel and Moos (1974) with its concerns for community member-physical-social environment interactions and maximally effective human functioning. As person-environment "fits" are identified, preventive consultation may develop into a social change technology and a community directed toward Iscoe's (1974) "competent community," a community whose members are independent, psychologically growing, and competent. In this case, preventive consultation promotes developmental intervention, a proactive approach directed toward growth, where serious problems do not exist nor are expected to occur, but where consultees are provided with methods for enhancing their functioning.

Rudolph (1976) calls the creation of such an environment, one responsive to a concern with values and the human experience, the challenge to higher education today" (p. 38). Echoing Brown, Rudolph sees colleges teaching values haphazardly, each new building a monument to a particular value. The counselor's office may be a sign of more human values, while the rest of the enterprise emphasizes the dehumanizing, the specialized, a "celebration of technical proficiency" (p. 39).










Indeed, humanizing the workplace is a challenge education shares with all the major institutions of our culture, only more so because of its role as leader and trainer of the young. In an article excerpted from the forthcoming book Work in America: The Decade Ahead (Clark Kerr and Jerome Rosow, ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1978), Daniel Yankelovich describes the tremendous tension between the old cultural values of subsuming one's individuality and personality in one's job and the new values of highly personalized work. This tension presents a crisis in the world of work, where the old values dominate the workplace, cited as being "among the most conservative of our institutions" (p. 46), and the new values dominate the work force. Yankelovich points out that while self-fulfillment needs have always been given full play for top level executives, the rank and file are expected to conform to a rigid regimen of group behavior. Lip service is given to "our employees are our greatest asset and their needs come first in our organization," but "in everyday life attention is paid to everything but people--capital requirements, technology, material resources, managerial techniques, political pressures, cost controls, and markets" (p. 50). Managers who have always relied on the old carrot-and-stick of wages, fringe benefits and possible job insecurity, find themselves frustrated when these things no longer satisfy an increasingly litigious group of employees who have










another value and reward system. Managers who understand this fact and the new value system will become the New Breed of managers in the 1980's.



Faculty Evaluation


An essential component of an Employee Assistance Program is the evaluation of individual performance, and much has been made of the difficulty of applying this component in a university setting. It is a problem which has not yet been solved. However, it is important to understand some of the issues involved.

An initial statement must be made about what evaluation is not. It is not what Wollansky (1976) calls the "black book" approach--the process wherein supervisors collect evidence for dismissal.


If the evaluation process is to serve as a
positive force and be accepted by every faculty member, he or she must perceive the benefits of the process as assisting one to improve his or her performance and being nonpunitive. (p. 81)


This point is of particular importance where an occupational program is concerned because a necessary element of an Employee Assistance Program is documentation by the supervisor of an employee's performance. If this documentation is to have value to the institution and the employee, it must be intelligent, verifiable, and have the










employee's best interests at heart. Anything less should not be tolerated in a university setting.

Wollansky states that the major purposes of the evaluation of faculty in higher education are the improvement of instruction and of the total educational environment. More specifically, evaluation should:


1) Provide each faculty with an appraisal of
his or her strengths and weaknesses.
2) Provide information (feedback) that encourages staff members to improve performance.
Such feedback will aid the individual faculty member to overcome weaknesses and more effectively utilize one's strengths.
3) Provide an informational basis on which a number of administrative decisions can be
made.
4) To determine in-service and professional
growth activities for faculty members to overcome identified deficiencies.
5) Provide open communications to strengthen
staff morale. (1976, pp. 81-82)


Wollansky also quotes Gage's (1959) three reasons for faculty evaluation: to provide a basis for administrative decisions involving promotions, salary increases, and tenure; to provide an information base for self-improvement; and to provide a criterion for research on teaching and learning.

Wollansky's review of faculty evaluation research indicates that:

1) The roles and time allocation of faculty vary

widely from institution to institution and










department to department.

2) Students do a better job of evaluating faculty

than administrators or peers.

3) "While most institutional evaluation procedures

point out individual faculty deficiencies, no

recommended paths for self-improvement are

stated" (1976, p. 82).

Similarly, Moomaw (1977) reports on a recent study by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) of 843 postsecondary institutions in the 14 states of the Southeastern region. This study concludes that the purpose of faculty evaluation is twofold: "formative evaluation, which is designed for professional development and improvement; and summative evaluation, whose aim is to provide data with which to make decisions regarding tenure, promotions, and salary increases" (p. 78). Which type of evaluation predominates, however, tends to vary with the type of institution. For example, summative evaluation tends to predominate in doctoral level institutions, formative in the twoyear colleges.

The study is quite clear that the ability of faculty evaluations to achieve stated purposes remains the greatest unknown. In fact, although most administrators were reportedly very positive about evaluation, administrators and faculty each thought they were involved in the evaluation process to serve the others' needs, indicating further










lack of clarity regarding the purpose and consequences of an evaluation system.

The SREB study also examined the elements of faculty evaluation and several models of evaluation currently in use. The findings most pertinent here, however, are the overall failure of formative evaluation to achieve its goal of faculty development and the general uninvolvement of faculty in the evaluation process. At the same time, the study reported that when faculty are involved and procedures are established and clear, evaluation is more readily accepted and morale is high.

Generally held beliefs about faculty evaluation systems run contrary to these findings, however, viz., that almost any evaluation system will somehow achieve a formative effect. An even greater discrepancy exists where summative evaluation is concerned in that the data used are generally considered reliable and valid. But the SREB study found that if the data are traced to their origin, they are found to be the results of unsystematic student surveys gathered in a haphazard way and, worse, hearsay and gossip accepted by department chairmen as comprehensive fact.

Only two exceptions were noted in the gathering of

student data, one in a doctoral level institution and one in a professional school. In these institutions student committees interview the instructor-in-question, other










students, and other instructors, review materials and examinations, and write a comprehensive report. The department chairmen involved have adjudged these reports to be the "best source of information they have ever received" (1977, p. 82).

But these are exceptions, and Moomaw concludes by referring to the following SREB statement, "It would be particularly unfortunate if a realistic attention to institutional efficiency and effectiveness must be enforced from outside the academic community" (p. 91). If sound evaluation is eventually as unavoidable as it is desirable, could not a faculty/employee assistance program act as a catalyst to as well as component of a systematic, student/faculty evaluation process?

To be considered in planning evaluation for faculty

and administrators is a broad view of evaluation in general. Van de Visse (cited in Wallenfeldt, 1974) notes that the emphasis in modern evaluation is on results. This emphasis is best exemplified in the management by objectives (MBO) approach in which superior and subordinate collaborate in determining the goals and objectives on which the employee will be evaluated. This approach has grown out of certain objective concepts developed by Likert: production, turnover, profit and loss, job satisfaction. The evidence is, however, that this concept is not widely applied in education and that its application is uneven










because administrators do not understand it or evaluation in general.

Wallenfeldt asserts that there is no question that

MBO is an advancement over evaluation of personality traits. However, the MBO approach is itself a development of evaluation practices in industry and the military, and the adoption of evaluation concepts from military, industrial, and government organizations is highly questionable when these organizations are themselves criticized for ineffective and inhumane evaluation practices. Referring to modern bureaucracies, Shomper and Philips have stated:


There seems to be little doubt that evaluation criteria now in use are, at least in the short
run, production rather than people-oriented.
Considerable reorientation is necessary before
people will enjoy coequal status with production . . . the degree of change required is unprecedented, involving revolutionary rather
than evolutionary actions. The entire climate
or state of mind of the organization must
change. (pp. 29-33)


Noting that accountability and evaluation in higher education are here to stay, Wallenfeldt cites two traditional methods of evaluation, measuring mechanical sets of behaviors and subjective ratings contingent upon personality biases and personal preferences. He asserts that these would be equally disastrous and inappropriate for university administrators and officials. Rather, what is needed is a broad philosophical framework as a crucial first step.








"Philosophical-qualitative issues must be resolved before psychological-quantitative measures are considered" (1976,p.7).

The approach he suggests is a general systems theory approach, which seems consistent with the goals of a human development organization. General systems theory is described by Sutherland (1974) as a shift from inductive-empirical methods, or reductionism, to deductive modalities of openness and complexity. Systems theory requires relinquishing the assumption "that the future will be some neat and calculable product of the past" (p. 9). It offers the most comprehensive approach to judging the effectiveness of personnel in a complex environment.

According to Sutherland, general systems theory generally advocates five approaches or strategies: delay of irrevocable commitments to action or monies until necessary; using time-limited, measurable objectives in planning; abandonment of bureaucratic organizational structures in favor of more versatile, ad-hoc structures; an emphasis on modular rather than hierarchical organization at all levels; and the application of disciplined learning to complex problem-solving and decision-making.

Wallenfeldt also supplies a checklist of philosophical criteria by which every evaluative decision should be scrutinized:


1) Does the action consider and attempt to
meet the need for safety (Maslow's primary human need)?




Full Text

PAGE 1

A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR A FACULTY/EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM BY C. HOWARD GRIMES A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1980

PAGE 2

Copyright 1980 By C. Howard Grimes

PAGE 3

To My Parents Howard L. and Mary Louise Grimes

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The interest, support, guidance, and hard work of many individuals has made possible the initiation and completion of this research. They warmly deserve my greatest thanks. My parents, to whom this work is dedicated, for giving me a love of learning. Carolyn, my wife, who devoted many long and painstaking hours typing and retyping the manuscript, often pointing out needed improvements, and all the while being a full time high school counselor and mother of my two children. She has given me the fullest wifely support in my work. Allison and Maggie, my perfect daughters, who often missed me or found me too tired, but nevertheless helped me be a father anyway. My committee chairman. Dr. Harold C. Riker, for his patience, support, and toil. Much of what I know about quality work is due to his guidance. Drs. E.L. Tolbert and James Wattenbarger , my doctoral committee, for their care and concern with my work, and Drs Tom Goodale, Larry Loesch, and John Nickens for their help and encouragement. My boss. Dee Williams, whose understanding and encouragement were of the highest value. iv

PAGE 5

Murray McLaughlin, whose idea this research area was in the first place. Lois Rudloff, who typed the final manuscript. V

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv ABSTRACT viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 2 Definition of Terms 12 Need for the Study 13 Purpose of the Study 15 Rationale 16 II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 21 History of the Occupational Programs in the United States 21 Occupational Programs in Higher Education 24 Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education and Industry 33 Implementating an Occupational Program . 51 Beyond the Industrial Model: Theoretical Approaches to Occupational Programs in Higher Education 70 Faculty Evaluation 85 Summary 93 III PROCEDURES 98 The Research Design 98 Selection Process 99 Instrumentation and Validation 102 Data Collection 105 Data Analysis 106 Limitations of the Study 107 IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY 109 Analysis of the Findings 109 Findings Related to the Research Questions 126 vi

PAGE 7

CHAPTER Page V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS . . 130 Summary 130 Discussion 131 Conclusions 137 Implications 138 Recommendations for Further Research . . 140 APPENDICES A NEEDS ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE 143 B STATE POLICY ON ALCOHOLISM 147 C UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE: PROCEDURES FOR THE TREATMENT OF EMPLOYEES WHOSE USE OF ALCOHOL AFFECTS THEIR PERFORMANCE .... 150 REFERENCES 155 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 161 vii

PAGE 8

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR A FACULTY/EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM By C. Howard Grimes December 1980 Chairman: Harold C. Riker Major Department: Counselor Education According to the studies of epidemiologists and other researchers of the workplace, university faculty may be at high risk to alcoholism and other emotional/behavioral problems. Additionally, it is an assumption of this study that the university cannot adequately meet the needs of its constituencies, students and the general public, without seriously attending to the human needs of its own employees. For these reasons, a university Employee Assistance Program could be of signal benefit to the university and its employees, though no such program now exists in the Florida State University System. An examination of the literature confirmed the benefits of Employee Assistance Programs for a number of institutions of higher education, provided a description of some of their special characteristics, and suggested that a theory for such programs in higher education lies in conceiving of universities as human development organizations. A viii

PAGE 9

questionnaire mailed to a random sample of faculty and administrators on three campuses of the State University System sought information on the need for such a program, some essential components, and the best approach to its implementation. A 47% response to the questionnaire from a sample of 385 was considered very good. Respondents almost unanimously affirmed the need for a faculty-employee assistance program and the obligation of the university to implement one. They also favored program design by committee, use of outside consultants, implementation through the Board of Regents and the president's office combined, location in the president's office administratively, and major medical coverage for emotional/behavioral problems. Opinions were mixed on differentiating procedures between faculty/administrators and other employees. A substantial number thought referrals were more likely to come from supervisors and least likely to come from peers. A majority did not favor a decentralized approach with the first point of contact being in the individual's own department. Sixty percent of the respondents were tenured; 26% were union members. Most (66%) were teaching or research faculty, the remainder being chairmen or administrators. Chairmen represented the smallest group (6%) . Responses to all questions by the various categories of respondents tended to be more similar than different. ix

PAGE 10

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A growing crisis for Western institutions has been their increasing bureaucratization and depersonalization. As individuals become less and less able to affect the structures that govern their lives, they become increasingly alienated and withdraw from those structures into egocentrism and narcissism. This alienation in turn threatens Western institutions, which become less and less viable even as they grow in size and power. Since the sixties, the cutting edge of this crisis has been felt on college and university campuses. Students rebelled against their universities not only because they were visible symbols of authority and close at hand, but also because higher education accurately mirrored the depersonalization that exists in Western society as a whole. Today the debate goes on in learned journals and professional conferences and some reforms have been made, but the drift of Western society in the seventies is still clearly toward bureaucratization and the increasing isolation of the individual (Lasch, 1977). Many people in higher education struggle mightily to find the elements of community and to begin building it on their campus, all the while laboring to keep the proverbial

PAGE 11

2 alligators of inflation-ridden budgets and political opportunists at bay. But there is one certain indicator often overlooked in attempts to renew institutions of higher education, and that is the treatment accorded the individuals who work for these institutions and depend on them for their livelihood. This is a basic assiimption of this study: institutions and organizations that genuinely regard their employees well may also treat their constituencies well; those that do not cannot. Statement of the Problem In a definitive work on the problems of alcohol and other problems in the workplace. Trice and Roman (1972) suggest that university employees, particularly faculty, may be most at risk where behavioral/medical problems are concerned. Low visibility of job performance, a characteristic of university faculty, implies the greatest risk, not because these individuals in the workplace are inherently more likely to develop problems, but because they are subject to fewer social controls when they do. Trice and Roman cite 12 different risk factors within four groupings. Emphasis is added to those factors thought to be more likely to be characteristic of university personnel: 1. Risks in which lack of visibility is most prominent include occupying job positions with nebulous production goals , occupying

PAGE 12

3 positions in which hours of work and schedules of output are flexible and largely an individual option , and occupying positions which keep the employee out of the purview of supervisors and work associates . 2. Risks where the absence of structure is most prominent include work addiction, work-role removal and occupational obsolescence, and entrance into a job position which is new to the organization. 3. The absence of social controls are (sic) particularly prominent in job roles where drinking is a part of the work role, job roles in which an employee's deviant drinking or drug use actually benefits others in the organization, and instances of mobility from a stressful job position with considerable control of deviance into an equally stressful position with few or no controls. 4. Miscellaneous risk factors which may be particularly relevant to drug use include role stresses which place individuals under severe strain but generally preclude their acting to reduce tfie stresses, organizational emphases on in tensely competitive struggles for scarce rewards , and the presence of illegal drug users in the work place. (p. 102) Although the work of Trice and Roman was limited to alcohol and drug abuse, there is every indication that the same risk factors hold true for such other work-performance problems as emotional, marital and family. Storm (1977) points out what may already be surmised by logic: that in any given employee population, some percentage will be seriously troubled by personal problems, whether medical, alcohol and drug related, emotional, marital, family, financial.

PAGE 13

4 or other. Still other employees will be on the road to serious problems. Most organizations do not have very effective procedures to deal with such employees, either for the organization's sake or the employee's. In most organizations, these employees are transferred, demoted, or even fired when their work performance begins to suffer or their performance problems can no longer be ignored, even when the organization has the best of intentions. This situation can create far greater problems for a university than for other, less people-oriented organizations. Some of the malaise presently experienced by students may be taken as symptomatic of the university bureaucracy's inability to deal effectively with its people problems. In a speech to student personnel administrators in San Francisco in 1975, theologian Robert McAfee Brown described what he called the "new despair" among students of the seventies: a student population so impressed by the variety and immensity of current world problems that they are overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness and hopelessness. He places the responsibility for changing this atmosphere of despair into one of hope squarely on the colleges and universities and asks whether they, in fact, will simply mirror the impersonal and changeless structure of the rest of society. More pointedly, he said:

PAGE 14

5 Can educational structures be humanized or not? . . . As long as students find universities unresponsive to hxaman needs, they will have no reason to feel that anything beyond, such as the Justice Department or the White House or General Motors, is likely to be responsive to human needs. (Brown, 1975, p. 19) Moreover, he raised important questions: Will we not have to raise some fundamental questions about the style of life of the college or university, if we expect to produce anything but students for whom despair is the overriding reality? . . . The enemy appears to be depersonalization. Can our colleges and universities become places where people count as people and not as objects? . . . If, in this relatively manageable environment of limited numbers in a limited space, we cannot find new possibilities to further community, in what ways can we expect students to create community in the infinitely more vast arenas to which they will emigrate after graduation? (1975, p. 19) Brown wonders whether the universities can become "breeding grounds for hope" for their constituents, and rhetorically asks how this could be possible while giving lip service to the value of the "whole person." Meanwhile, procedures become increasingly impersonal and supposedly "value-free" policies and actions reinforce a bureaucratic standard profile rather than accommodate the individual. He suggests simply that it is past time for educators' deeds to match their fine words. Administrators must often feel at a loss on hearing exhortative sermons such as Brown's. What is to be done? Increase one's private virtue? Greater vigilance against

PAGE 15

6 a Nixon-Watergate philosophy in the organization? Once again the simplest corrective actions prove the most elusive. While these suggestions may prove efficacious, the real remedy is more immediate and more difficult: it is careful attention to the treatment of others in the community and in the workplace especially, not only the students, but also the employees — peers, superiors, and subordinates. The author believes that there is nowhere that this concern could prove more beneficial to both the organization and the individual — employee or constituent — than in a humane and practical policy for employees with behavioral/medical problems. It is such an obvious area of need that most organizations do evince some concern through sick leave and insurance policies with certain medical benefits. However, there are still large areas where these problems trouble both the individual and the organization seriously, and such procedures as there are tend to be inadequate, inappropriate, or even primitive (Roman, 1977a) . A number of articles in both the popular and the "trade press have examined behavioral/medical problems in the workplace and their costs to both the organization and the individual, including such publications as Business Week , Wall Street Journal , Labor Management Alcoholism Journal , and Resident and Staff Physician . In a university, where

PAGE 16

7 teaching is a major function, these problems may also be said to exist. An article on elementary and secondary teachers, by Harlin (1976) , articulates the problem as it relates to teaching. Harlin describes ten areas of health concern for teachers, including the emotional or psychosomatic and systemic. The former is one of the most common reasons for teachers missing work and can have the most negative effects on students. There is a wide range, everything from moodiness to depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and alcohol and drug abuse. One New York physician says that next to colds, stomach problems are the most common complaint of teachers, often making them difficult for students and impossible to work with. In a case cited, change of employment was not necessary because the teacher sought medical advice and heeded it. But the problem is not usually as simple as that. Alcoholism is on the rise nationwide among teachers but is often overlooked by co-workers and supervisors. Teachers fear the reactions of administrators and peers and alcohol abuse programs are rare. Harlin, Director Health Services Seattle Public Schools, and Jerrich, Executive Director American School Health Association, Founder National Center for Health and Leadership in Education, hope their study of teacher health will lead to "improved health of school personnel, inproved school environmental conditions, increased

PAGE 17

8 job performance and satisfaction, and a savings of tax dollars" (1976, p. 66) . The problem might very well be put another way. Gordon, in the Chamber of Commerce publication Michigan Challenge (1973) , asserts that if companies with unwritten policies on alcohol/behavioral/medical problems actually wrote those policies out, they might look something like this: Notice to All Employees: Do you have a drinking problem, emotional illness, or other drug dependency problem? If so, management challenges you to outsmart us and keep your problem concealed from management and we will pay you several thousand dollars in group hospitalization, sick leave, and other fringe benefits. If you should fail, however, and we learn about your condition, your employment may be terminated. (p. 27) Rule of thumb figures on the extent of the "troubled employee" problem often are estimated as 10% of a given work force, about 5% troubled with alcoholism and 5% with other problems — emotional, medical, financial, marital and so on (Storm, 1977) . Although these figures connote the seriousness of the problem, and some organizational experiences bear them out, they are probably a bit inflated. Roman (1978) says that a survey of top executives in companies both with and without programs to deal with troubled employees indicates that nearly all disagree with the rule of thumb figures, seeing the actual percentages in their organization as smaller. However, it is abundantly clear that, protestations

PAGE 18

9 of defensive managers to the contrary, no organization is exempt from this problem. Trice and Roman estimate that the problems of alcohol and drug abuse in the workplace affect between 3 and 4% of the work population, and by extension, they say most experience indicates that the frequency of other employee problems, such as emotional ones, is a comparable figure, or another 3 or 4%. The significance of these figures, however, may not be immediately apparent: This figure might seem minute, and a problem of such low prevalence might not appear worthy of a management's attention. When the potential impact of any one deviant drinker is considered, however, the relevance of the problem for organizational functioning mounts rapidly. In other words, the disruptive consequences of deviant drinking may far exceed the cost entailed if 4% of the work force were absent or simply sat at their jobs and did practically nothing. The very essence of a work organization is the interdependence of job performances. Deviance by one employee may "reverberate" beyond his work station or desk, sometimes disrupting an entire organization. Thus the prevalence figures alone do not tell the full story. (1972, p. 2) Trice and Roman report several consequences of alcoholism or other drug abuse on job behaviors: considerably lowered efficiency (except with early amphetamine use) ; surprisingly low turnover; time and energy spent by deviant drinkers and their co-workers and supervisors in coverup activities; and high rates of absenteeism. On-the-job accident rates were not unusually high, however, compared

PAGE 19

10 with median accident rates , probably due in part to extra caution and the above-mentioned absentee rates. About absenteeism among high-status workers, these authors say that actual absenteeism may remain relatively low, whereas "on-the-job" absenteeism is high: A district sales manager expressed this attitude, "I had an ingrained sense of duty and it would not be drowned in alcohol. In all my years of work I was conscientious about being on the job, so as badly as I would feel I would get up, shake it off, and go to work." A university professor stated that his "abhorrence of irresponsibility" did not leave him even when he became fully dependent on alcohol, while others spoke of maintaining high standards for themselves. Obviously these jobs provided opportunities for lower visibility and on-the-job absenteeism not available to lower-status workers. This continued presence on the job helped convince the deviant employees that they were still normal. A production engineer rationalized this way: "As long as you appeared at places when you were expected to, and as long as you did some sort of skeleton thing, pretending to do your job . . . all these things meant that you did not have the problem you knew you really had. . . . Somehow, it was not getting the better of me. . . . I could go to to work." (1972, p. 137) The effects of deviant drinking on the job are described from several studies cited in Trice and Roman. For example, blue collar workers tend to turn in poor work performances after benders or in late stages of alcoholism through absenteeism and sharp declines in work efficiency. White collar performance, however, may actually improve

PAGE 20

11 through compensation, since white collar alcoholics report steady promotions through early and middle stages of alcoholism. Some of these workers did not have hard and fast work standards to be measured against, but the pattern of compensating through short-term, improved performance seems well established. Meanwhile, the promotions served to enhance the alcoholics ' denial system and prevent early intervention. Of overall studies, supervisors ranked "neglecting details formerly attended to," "lower quantity of work," and "lower quality of work" as first of 44 possible job-related impairments for alcoholics, and alcoholics were rated "the worst" in performance compared to psychotics, neurotics and normals (Trice & Roman, 1972) . At the end of his San Francisco speech. Brown asserts that only when administrators' work has its own inner integrity will students learn enduring values and respond creatively. Surely a program that is designed to reach people in need of help at the same time that it improves the functioning of the organization is a creative response to solving real problems and is a strong affirmation of truly hximan values. Here is an opportunity, an obligation to do work with integrity: to implement a policy and a program that will effectively reach and help the troubled employees of the university and enhance the whole university community. This approach already exists and has proven most successful in a variety of settings, including higher

PAGE 21

12 education. It is called an employee assistance program (EAP) . Definition of Terms Occupational Programs For purposes of this study, an occupational program is defined as a managerial procedure designed to identify, confront, and refer seriously troubled employees within a work organization and to provide all employees with a means of seeking help should they so desire. The purpose of an occupational program is not only to help the individual but also to improve the functioning and output of the organization. Employee Assistance Programs These programs adopt the broadest possible approach for an occupational program. They seek to reach the troubled employee through declining job performance, and also offer employees assistance before work performance is adversely affected. Some employee assistance programs (EAP) offer a strong prevention element and conduct programs of personal development. Troubled Employee This term refers to any member of a work organization, non-professional, professional, or managerial, who has

PAGE 22

13 behavioral/medical problems of such a nature as to affect work performance adversely or which would motivate that person to seek help. Need for the Study In mid-1977, there were 22 occupational programs existing or being implemented in institutions of higher learning in the United States (Godwin, 1977). By mid-1978, this number had grown to 38, (UM/EAP, unpublished paper, 1978) still a very small number for the large number of colleges and universities in the country, but indicating an increase in interest. Annual conferences on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education have been held since 1975 under the sponsorship of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and, since 1976, in co-sponsorship with the University of Missouri-Columbia (UM) . NIAAA has borne a national leadership role for the development of occupational programs since the founding of its Occupational Programs Branch in 1972. Its past director, Ernest P. Noble, told an Atlanta audience of occupational programmers in 1977 that NIAAA was interested in new techniques and alternative approaches to improve occupational programs generally, but that a plateau of innovation had probably been reached, excepting one area. "What we need now ... is the development of effective occupational

PAGE 23

14 programs to cover employed people in occupations and professions in which supervision is remote or unstructured." {Southeastern Occupational Program Training Conference [SOPTC] , pages unnumbered) Godwin, chief of NIAAA's Occupational Programs Branch, says that three criteria stand out as NIAAA strives to develop the OP concept in the future: proposals should incorporate a new model or a significant modification of an old one (e.g., for a specific population); they should have a strong evaluation component; and they should emphasize strategies for early identification of troubled employees in the professions or other relatively unstructured settings. He cites NIAAA's demonstration project at the University of Missouri-Columbia as an example of a model incorporating these emphases. The results seem to indicate that the program works by the mere fact of its existence, i.e., through peer pressure and self-referrals. Focus on job performance, however, is largely abandoned, at least for faculty and administration. In an unpublished paper distributed at the 197 8 Conference on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education, the UM/EAP staff confess that the problem of how to evaluate academic performance remains baffling, and they surmise that the same is true in other universities. The situation is likened to civil service systems where it is practically impossible to fire anyone and job performance criteria are elusive.

PAGE 24

15 It remains, then, to promote occupational programs in higher education and to develop a performance-based program for faculty and professional/managerial staff. Not only is NIAAA interested in developing a performance-based program for universities and professionals, but the performance-based program is still the most effective and proven approach (Trice & Roman, 1972) . Occupational programs are people-oriented programs that belong especially in people-oriented organizations such as universities. They enjoy high rates of success where they are implemented, but there are special considerations in adapting them to institutions of higher education and indeed in adapting them to any local situation, such as the Florida State University System or an individual campus . Purpose of the Study This study attempts to build a theoretical and data base for an employee assistance program for use in the Florida State University System (SUS) . In doing so, it examines the following questions: 1. What are the elements in the literature for a theory of employee assistance programs in higher education?

PAGE 25

16 2. Have faculty and administrators in the State University System encountered personal problems among their peers that could affect work performance? 3. Do faculty and administrators in the State University System perceive a faculty/employee assistance ] program as necessary and/or desirable on their camI pus? 4. What are some essential components of an employee assistance program model for the State University System? 5. What is the best approach to implementation of an employee assistance program in the State University System on both a local and system-wide level? 6. From the literature, what is a realistic approach to the performance evaluation component of an employee assistance program where faculty are concerned? Rationale The effectiveness of occupational programs lies in a powerful conjunction of forces that includes (1) the strong desire of individuals to keep their jobs, (2) the fact that serious personal problems nearly always become obvious in impaired work performance one way or another, (3) an organization's expectation that employees perform adequately, and i i I

PAGE 26

17 (4) the fact that confidential help is available in the right place at the right time. "Constructive confrontation," the process whereby a supervisor confronts an employee with his or her declining work performance and offers professional help before invoking disciplinary action, is the heart of an occupational program. Trice and Roman call it "one of the few legitimate avenues, save police power," for an effective intervention into a deviant's life that can motivate a change in behavior (1972, p. 171). There is no need for supervisors to become diagnosticians — that may in fact be counterproductive. What is required is simply that the supervisor be skilled in his/her basic responsibility of judging job performance and being equipped to refer employees with impaired performance. Once an organization has a clear-cut policy on behavioral/ medical problems that emphasizes early intervention and effective confrontation, and which is consistently supported on all levels of management and union, a high potential for success at prevention and rehabilitation exists in the supervisor's role. Such potential exists because it is the supervisor who has both the contact with the troubled employee and the power to take action when a change in behavior is imperative. This condition is particularly true in the employee assistance program, which places clear-cut responsibilities on supervision and offers a broad-based mental health approach to employee performance problems.

PAGE 27

18 Evidence of the success of the occupational program concept is ample. For example, where success is defined as a return to satisfactory job performance and improvement in relationships with individuals or functioning in the community, E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., with an occupational alcohol program, reports a 66% success rate with 950 alcoholics referred for treatment. Bethlehem Steel Corporation reports a 60% success rate, and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., an 80% success rate (Storm, 1977) . Comparatively new programs in higher education, at the University of Missouri or Boston College, for example, report similar rates of success (see Chapter II) . In applying the OP concept to higher education, Roman (1977b) points out the necessity of recognizing the social and hierarchical realities of an organization. While one policy may be written for all employees, procedures, which are essentially what motivate an employee to use the program, should not be the same for all. Rather, procedures should be written to fit the population they are intended for — physical plant employees, say, or faculty, and training programs and referral agencies should likewise be tailored or selected for a specific employee population. The procedures must be written to fit the population or they may be unworkable. More specifically, Roman (1978) concludes that nonacademic staff present no special problems to implementing

PAGE 28

19 an employee assistance program in light of experience with program implementation in business or governmental settings. Faculty, on the other hand, have a separate administrative structure and indeed are recognized as an essentially different group from non-academic staff, and as professionals therefore require a different approach than the traditional industrial model. If policy and procedures are to be tailored to differing groups within the organization, the best source for the initiation and implementation of those policies is not so easily determined. The Tulane Project (Roman, 1977a) studied 100 Federal civilian installations to check the effectiveness of the Federal employee alcoholism policy legislated four years earlier in 1970. The inescapable conclusion was that when a program is simply mandated from the top dov/nward to local installations, "not much happens" (SOPTI, no. p.). Similarly, the Florida State Policy on Alcoholism (see Appendix B) is a sound and humane statement on the problem, but its application at the local level is likely to be uneven, at best. Wattenbarger (1974) , however, cites the growth of central bureaucracies at the state level in public higher education and asserts that, since that is where the power is, there is a commensurate need for leadership at that level. It is only logical to infer, then, that while

PAGE 29

20 top-down program implementation may not of itself be very effective, leadership at that level is essential. In sum, it is the assumption of this study that one of the obligations of the university is to its employees and that it cannot adequately meet the needs of its constituencies, students and general public, without seriously attending to the human needs of those employees. It is a further assumption that the OP concept is a significant and necessary step in that direction which may bring untold benefit not only to individuals but also to the university as a community and an organization. For an employee assistance program to be properly implemented in public higher education, consideration must be given to an effort at both the grassroots and the state coordinating levels. For such a program to be truly effective, a process must be found whereby the quality of faculty performance may be determined.

PAGE 30

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In this review of the literature the following topics will be considered: the history of occupational programs in the U.S., existing programs in higher education, the likenesses and differences between industrial programs and programs in higher education, implementation of a program on campus, a theory of occupational programs in higher education, and faculty evaluation as it relates to occupational programs. History of Occupational Programs in the United States The history of occupational programs is one of growth from a courageous albeit narrowly-defined emphasis on alcoholism to a broad program of prevention that has become a major innovation in the mental health field. James Baxter (1978) links the establishment of occupational programs to the founding of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and the Yale School of Alcohol Studies in the 1930 's. The earliest programs were established at E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., and the Eastman Kodak Co. in the early forties, with Consolidated Edison and Allis-Chalmers following closely behind. In an interesting anecdote concerning Allis-Chalmers, Baxter 21

PAGE 31

22 points out the high level of interest on the part of management because of the obvious economic advantages , and on the part of unions because of a fraternal, humanitarian concern and the desire to save jobs. Only the medical director balked at treating alcoholism as a straightforward medical problem (until the program became a clear success) , an obstinacy and opportunism which Baxter says has characterized the medical profession down to the present day. Baxter also points out that these early programs usually depended upon the fervor of a newly recovered alcoholic who wished to share his sobriety with the whole world. As such, these programs were then purely alcohol abuse programs concerned with identifying employees who exhibited a pronounced alcoholic behavior. Consequently, they were successful in reaching only late stage alcoholics whose behavior had so deteriorated that their alcoholism could no longer be concealed. Supervisors, also, trained to spot alcoholic behavior, were reluctant to tag an employee with the socially opprobrious term "alcoholic." The result was a great deal of cover-up, at least until the alcoholic had clearly passed all acceptable limits of behavior. It was not until the sixties, when the work of Trice, Roman, and Belasco established job performance criteria as the means of identifying the troubled employee that measuring job performance alone became an accepted principle of occupational programs. Supervisors were then trained to spot not alcoholic behavior but declining job performance.

PAGE 32

23 It was also at this time that Presnall and von Wiegand of the National Council on Alcoholism (NCA) described the rough measures of dollar loss from alcoholism. They reported that approximately 5% of a given work force may have alcohol problems, that this situation results in approximately a 25% salary loss for employers, and that a good occupational program will reach about 20% of these individuals in its first year of operation, achieving a 60-80% recovery rate. From these rule-of -thumb figures, a company can approximate its present alcohol dollar loss and the savings it can achieve with an occupational program (Baxter, 1978 , p. 10) . The Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (PL 91-616) and the founding of NIAAA's Occupational Programs Branch in 1972 gave added impetus to occupational programs. Seeking the most effective way to prevent alcoholism, NIAAA adopted a "broad-brush" or Employee Assistance Program approach and began promoting occupational programs. But the occupational program effort is still relatively new and business and industry have not yet shown themselves ready to embrace the concept unanimously. Most recent estimates indicate there are between one and two thousand occupational programs in the nation (Storm, 1977) . Presently active in promoting occupational programs are the following: Labor-Management Committee of NCA,

PAGE 33

24 chaired by James Roche and George Meany; various programs sponsored by NIAAA, including the United Labor of Missouri program, individual grants for occupational program consultants, and the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program (UMEAP) ; and the Association of Labor-Management Administrators and Consultants on Alcoholism (ALMACA) . In Florida, the Florida Occupational Program Connittee, Inc., (FOPC) acts as an organization of all those whose work or interests include occupational programs. Occupational Programs in Higher Education Of the 38 occupational programs existing in higher education, several stand out as leading examples of effective programs by virtue of their comprehensiveness or longevity or both. Those examined here include programs at the University of Missouri, the University of Delaware, Boston College, Rutgers University, Appalachian State University, and the Rochester Institute of Technology. These programs illustrate different approaches in similar and dissimilar institutions . University of Missouri-Columbia Employee Assistance Program (UMEAP ) The first of these programs, at the University of Missouri-Columbia, is one of the more noteworthy because it has been, since its inception in the fall of 1975, an

PAGE 34

25 NIAAA-sponsored project intended as a model for occupational programs in higher education. Its director, Richard Thoreson, describes the UMEAP as "a referral resource for University employees who are having problems persistent enough to interfere with their job performance," a program using the "broad brush" approach to job performance problems such as alcohol, drugs, marital, legal, parent-child, medical, psychological. The focus is always upon deterioration of job performance as a function of persistent personal problems (1977, p. 31). Dr. Herbert Schooling (1977) was chancellor at the University of Missouri when the program was implemented and through its first three years of operation. He cites these reasons for its implementation: 1. The university is a "high personnel utilization kind of enterprise," with about 70% of the University of Missouri's budget going for salaries and wages. That means the university is highly dependent on the quality of its personnel, and if quality suffers, the whole university will be adversely affected. 2. A university is very sensitive to public opinion, and it is people who work for the university who will determine the positive or negative tone of that opinion. How well they are perceived to perform their jobs, the services they render around the state, and their own positive feelings about their work are the determiners of public opinion.

PAGE 35

26 Chancellor Schooling also delineates the elements he considers most important for the University of Missouri's EAP: it has an Advisory Committee which is interested in the program, speaks for employees, and gives it credibility; it is identified with the administration; and it is recognized as a program for all employees. The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program includes cooperative relationships among the campus counseling center, the credit union, and academic divisions such as the law school and department of psychiatry. This program reports a total of 175 direct referrals in its first two years of operation (1975-1977) , 21% of whom were professional employees or faculty and 8% of whom were dependents. The rest were hourly employees or other. Demographic characteristics of referrals were similar to those of university personnel as a whole. Indirect or self-referrals for those two years totaled 136, over 50% of whom were faculty, exempt employees, or dependents. In addition, the 1976-1977 figures represent more than a 100% increase over the 1975-1976 figures for faculty and professional employees and nearly the same increase for hourly employees. In other words, the second year of the program provided its larger margin of growth — 2.4 times for direct referrals, 1.5-1.7 for indirect. Of the estimated 7% troubled employees on the University of Missouri campus, approximately 10% were reached the 1 i

PAGE 36

27 first year and 30% the second. A follow-up on 77 EAP clients through their supervisors reports an 81% improvement of job performance within 60 days. If 15% of salary is taken as an index of deterioration of job performance (a figure commonly used and a low average of estimates by supervisors and department chairmen) , the program saved $82,74 6 over its costs in the second year of operation (Thoresen et al., 1977). Dr. Joseph White, Provost for Health Affairs at the University of Missouri, says of the program: I have participated in and observed our own EAP program for the past three years. . . . As the third year of operation begins, we can say without reservation that it has been successful in solving job-related problems of employees in a university community. (1978, p. 3) University of Delaware Employee Assistance Program The first occupational program in higher education was begun at the University of Delaware in early 1974. It is mentioned here because it was the first, because it emphasizes alcohol problems, and because it has probably the most comprehensive policy extant in terms of treatment. The Delaware program is a job performance program operated under the auspices of the Provost for faculty and the Vice President of Employee Relations for all other employees. The program policy states that employees with more than two years of service or tenure who are determined by

PAGE 37

28 the University Psychiatrist and either of the two officers mentioned above to have a drinking problem affecting their work performance shall be eligible for treatment at a university-selected treatment center for 30 days on a leavewith-pay status. Employees with less than two years service or without tenure are treated on an ad hoc basis. Nothing in the EAP procedures abrogates established university policies and procedures for dismissal (Butler, 1976) . The complete policy statement may be found in Appendix C. Boston College Faculty-Staff Assistance Program The Boston College Faculty-Staff Assistance Program (F-SAP) was established in 1975 and is aimed mainly at faculty. It operates on a collegial model with an advisory committee consisting of representatives of each academic dean and of other identifiable constituencies such as the union and hourly employees. It presumes that the performance-referral model does not apply, but of 40% responding to a faculty survey, 76% said they would welcome intervention by the department chairman! The program is operated out of the Department of Social Work and student interns are often utilized for short-term counseling and referral. Of 1500 employees at Boston College (525 of this number are full-time faculty), 110, approximately 8.9%, sought help through the F-SAP between March, 1975, and May, 1977. Their problems were identified as follows: 36, alcohol and

PAGE 38

29 other drugs; 23, mental/physical health; 21, financial/ legal/housing; 20, f ami ly /marital ; 6, work/career; 4, other (Masi, 1977). Rutgers University Personnel Counseling Service The University Personnel Counseling Service (UPCS) at Rutgers has the following function as defined by Ann Baxter (1977) : . . . to attempt to identify employees whose work performance had been or was about to be negatively affected by one or more such factors (behavioral-emotional problems, alcoholism, financial difficulties) , and to offer them and/or their families services designed to remove these factors as barriers to the employee's career effectiveness. (p. 34) Baxter agrees with Masi that a short-term, in-house counseling program is entirely appropriate for a university Employee Assistance Program. Being on-campus, it makes the program more accessible to the employee, and university counselors are intimately acquainted with job-related problems — the second most common type at the UPCS. There is also a preventative aspect in that employees will frequently drop in just to explore whether they have a problem, often uncovering a matter that can be cleared up rather quickly. Community resources are still used for long-term counseling, but contact is maintained until the case is resolved.

PAGE 39

30 Where students are concerned, however, the University Personnel Counseling Service makes a sharp break from the practice of the Boston College program. Rather than making use of interns and encouraging student participation, the University Personnel Counseling Service completely divorces itself from the student population. Counselors carry the rank of associate professor and regularly confer with medical/psychiatric consultants. This approach was adopted in response to faculty who said from the beginning that they "would not utilize the service if students were among the counselors or were utilized in any other manner whatsoever" (A. Baxter, 1977, p. 33). Four hundred ninety-six employees have used the University Personnel Counseling Service since it opened in September, 1974. If 7% of the university population are considered at risk, the 315 cases completed successfully as of July, 1977 represent 75% of the at-risk population, including 46% bf the faculty at risk. The success rate, also 75%, compares favorably with the 60-80% success rates usually claimed for industrial programs. Appalachian State University Employee Assistance Program Appalachian State University (ASU) has 9,000 students, 500 full-time faculty, and 800 staff, and is located in the relatively rural town of Boone, NC (pop. 12,500). From April, 1975 to July, 1977, 72 employees or dependents used

PAGE 40

31 the ASU program. Twenty-five of these were faculty, 31 staff. Fourteen were faculty dependents, 2 were staff dependents. Only 18, 7 faculty and 12 staff, were supervisory referrals, the other being peer, family, or self-referrals. Fifty-six of the total 72 were referred elsewhere for further assistance. Major problems were as follows: alcohol, 22, other drugs, 2, and marital problems, 36. Al Greene (1978), the director of the program, points out that the low number of supervisory referrals is to be expected, given the nature of university programs. However, another perspective might be to note the relatively high number of "walk-in" referrals, since Trice and Roman (1972) have pointed out that supervisors are traditionally reluctant to make referrals anyway, even in industry. Greene also notes that "perhaps the chief advantage to the university as base for an occupational program is that much of the target group is well-educated and committed to personal and professional growth" (1978, p. 45). In addition, the organization of staff along more traditional industrial lines also generates referrals, but by suppervisors . The Appalachian State University program is located administratively and geographically on campus in the Psychological Services Center, which is the student counseling service. Counseling is free for students, but faculty and staff pay a fee based on a sliding scale after their first

PAGE 41

32 visit. The faculty counseling and consultation service is provided by Greene himself, who has a one-quarter time release from teaching duties. Indeed, the whole program, from introduction to implementation to service provision, has been the work of Al Greene alone. Rochester Institute of Technology Employee Assistance Program The Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) Employee Assistance Program is as much an in-house program as a referral program, and, like the University of Delaware Employee Assistance Program, it also is oriented toward alcohol problems. Two alcohol treatment counselors work for the program on a volunteer basis, and AA, Alanon, and Alateen groups are available on campus or are in the planning process. One faculty member from the College of Business has volunteered to help those with financial problems, and a study of student drinking habits is being conducted as part of the development of a Student Council on Alcohol. Some employees helped by the RIT program have volunteered to assist others with similar problems. Of 51 RIT employees who contacted the Employee Assistance Program between October, 1975 and August, 1977, 49 continued employment and 2 eventually terminated voluntarily. Men and women who sought help were nearly equal in number, with about one-third of the women and threefourths of the men being supervisory referrals. About 50%

PAGE 42

33 were alcohol-related problems; the other half, financial, marital and family, and emotional problems. This sampling of existing occupational programs in higher education gives some idea of their range, diversity, and effectiveness in several kinds of institutions. The uniqueness of programs in higher education when compared with industrial programs is discussed in the following section. Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education and Industry Employee Assistance Programs in business, industry, and government have as their goal the elimination of job performance problems through early intervention on behalf of troubled employees, i.e., employees with behavioral/ medical/emotional problems such as alcoholism or marital problems. These programs are thought not only to help the troubled employee, but also to offer the organization substantial savings in lost production time and in time spent for the recruitment and training of new employees. These programs focus on job performance as the chief means for intervention with the troubled employee. It is assumed that serious behavioral/medical/emotional difficulty will almost inevitably lead to a clear pattern of poor job performance over a period of time. Consistent and systematic monitoring of job performance by supervisors, for 1 i

PAGE 43

34 all employees and over a period of time, will not fail to identify the troubled employee. The components of an employee assistance program which make successful intervention possible are, in addition to monitoring job performance: a written policy statement explaining that the organization considers behavioral/medical/emotional problems to be like any other health problem, that employees who seek help for these problems will not be penalized in any way, and that help is available; a set of written procedures for supervisors and employees using the program; explicit labor-management cooperation in program development and operation; top level management personnel responsible for the successful operation of the program and the referral of employees to outside helping resources; orientation of supervisors and shop stewards regarding their responsibilities in the program; dissemination of information about the program to all employees; health insurance coverage for the problems the program is intended to treat or prevent; and complete confidentiality for all employees using the program (Storm, 1977) . Uniqueness of the University Setting Several themes recur in the literature regarding the problems and advantages in introducing an employee assistance program in a university setting. Reichman (1977) delineates six major differences between industry and higher education :

PAGE 44

35 1. Colleges and universities are not guided by a single, unifying purpose or group of purposes . In the words of Robert M. Hutchins, they are characterized by "aimlessness . " 2. Faculty members are often evaluated more by their standing in their discipline than by their relationship to their college. 3. Colleges and universities are less hierarchical in organizational structure than business and industry. Evaluation of faculty is based more on peer bargaining than supervision. 4 . There is a strong belief among academic personnel that intellectual activity is not measurable by precise standards . 5. Students — those most affected by faculty — have the least power to bring about change through faculty evaluation, or do not exercise what power they do have. 6. Faculty/administration relationships are often characterized by conflict and mistrust. Administrators are responsible for the quality of the faculty, while the faculty usually decide who gets the rewards of the institution: appointments, promotion, tenure. Reichman summarizes what he calls these negative factors this way: Negatives 1. Multiple purpose of college and university 2. Peer evaluation often not real evaluation

PAGE 45

36 3. Faculty attachment to own discipline and not to college 4. Impossible to evaluate faculty — no standards 5. Conflict and mistrust between faculty and administration. (1977, p. 92) However, there are positive elements found in higher education and not necessarily found in industry. They offer important advantages: 1. Faculty are faced with a poor job market. Mobility is sharply decreased and tenure is being questioned. Faculty must now present good evidence of their work. 2. Administrators are faced with a fairly static, aging employee population. If they want to improve their college, therefore, they must improve existing personnel. 3. Most faculty have come to think that evaluation of their performance centered around teaching, research, student advisement, and administration is perfectly acceptable. Most favor involvement of students, colleagues, and chairmen. 4. Faculty development, once limited to intra-disciplinary improvements, has a new emphasis on teaching performance. 5. There is greater recognition that a faculty member's professional work is intimately connected with his/her personal life. Professional development and quality of work may be affected positively or negatively by health, family life, or personal habits. Reichman points to an AAUP statement here:

PAGE 46

37 It is not only the character of the instruction but the character of the instructor that counts. If the student has reason to believe that the instructor is not true to itself (sic) , the education is incalculably diminished. (1977, p. 91) 6. Employee Assistance Program training can capitalize on the diversity and self-motivation characteristic of faculty by aiming at faculty interests, thus generating intrinsic satisfaction and more faculty involvement. 7. Although faculty enjoy many privileges, universities are still a bureaucracy with most of the power vested in administrators who act as decision-makers like business executives. They, in cooperation and a spirit of mutual concern with faculty, will determine the nature of the training program. 8. Unionization is encouraging the destruction of the college professor mystique and faculty are coming to accept themselves as workers. Reichman summarizes: Positives 1. Faculty tied to university — poor job market 2. Administrators must deal with faculty to improve college 3. New emphasis on faculty development apart from specialization 4. New emphasis on faculty evaluation 5. Recognition that professional work is connected with personal life 6. Diversity and intrinsic motivation makes for in-depth involvement in areas of interest 7. College is a bureaucracy with most power at the top

PAGE 47

38 8. Mystique of college professor is being diluted and perception as worker taking over. (1977, pp. 92-93) Reichman suggests that the positives and negatives are ends of a continuum, and that it is necessary to locate a particular institution on that continuum to determine what program elements should be emphasized. Thoresen et al. (1977) distinguishes between program elements common to all Employee Assistance Programs and those unique to universities. Those common to all programs are: 1) a basic emphasis on job performance, 2) a formal training program for supervisors, 3) a means of articulating cost effectiveness, 4) linkages with treatment resources, 5) confidentiality, 6) high-level support, and 7) a guiding committee for the program. Program elements which are unique to a university are described by Thoresen by means of six questions: 1. Is cost effectiveness in terms of faculty and staff productivity important in a university, and if it is can it be measured? Herein lies one of the fundamental dilemmas found in a university setting, this being that the basic qualities of a first-rate university simply do not lend themselves at all well to quantitative analysis. How, for example, do we measure quantitatively the profound impact that a fine teacher may have on the minds of several of his most promising students? How do we measure, in addition, the subtle inculcation of values that permeate teacher-student

PAGE 48

39 interactions, and exert a profound, and hopefully, positive influence on the student's future contribution to society? Universities, to be charitable, are not particularly cost effective. There is no special incentive that is built into a university's reward system for efficient performance. (1977, p. 63) Applied to faculty, the performance goal of adding to scholarship is vague and illusive and must be made more specific in a program for faculty. 2. Who is a supervisor? Not only are deans, department chairmen, and other officials supervisors, but many other university personnel and faculty have responsibilities for other employees. An orientation toward "good supervision" becomes critical in the training process. 3. How may the principles of academic freedom and self -direction that make for Nobel Prize winners and the monitoring of work performance be reconciled in a way that permits intervention in time of personal crisis? Here Thoresen alludes to the Trice and Roman study (1972) and notes that the very elements that encourage Nobel Prize winners — freedom and self-direction — also produce the greatest risks of deviant drinking and drug abuse in the absence of supervision and low visibility of job performance. The interaction of university environment and individual behavior suggests a developmental approach to a university program. 4. What are the typical tasks, crises, rewards of university academic personnel? Here Thoresen concludes that there

PAGE 49

40 is a natural decline in performance in an aging university faculty, and that a developmental approach will distinguish between this natural trend and significant deterioration resulting from other causes. 5. Are the personal crises of alcohol abuse, divorce, and depression typical of middle-aged male faculty predominant in most universities? Epidemiological studies indicate this is indeed the case, and that there is a special, protective rationalization attached to the professions by society that prevents them from confronting these problems (Robe, 1977) . Confrontation in a university setting is further prevented by a confusion between this protection and academic freedom. Thoresen concludes that education and an indirect approach generating self-referrals is the proper response. 6. What is the principal reward system for non-academic and support staff? These staff are strongly differentiated from an elite faculty by salary and relative organizational neglect. Non-academic staff must be thought of as an important part of the university ecosystem and included in program planning. Thoresen goes on to delineate the elements unique to a university program as follows: 1) an emphasis on both remedial and developmental components, or in other terms, both treatment and prevention;

PAGE 50

41 2) an emphasis on early intervention as secondary prevention and threrfore on self-referrals, especially in a setting where self-development is stressed and performance is not easily measured; 3) a longer period of time allowed for implementation of a thorough program, because of the greater complexity of universities and the reluctance of faculty to cooperate with the bureaucracy; 4) a need to respect the special characteristics of a university, such as taking advantage of existing university resources like on-campus counseling services or expertise; 5) an orientation training program that includes all of these modes of prevention, i.e., not only supervisory skills and confrontation but also faculty and staff development. Supervision of Faculty and Administrators Hank Riggs (Besch, et al., 1977), an associate professor in microbiology at the University of Missouri, cites several difficulties he sees in implementing an occupational program for faculty: 1. Evaluating performance is complicated by the functional separation of department chairmen or deans and their faculty—there is very little contact between the two— and the lack of specific duties in faculty contracts. Riggs calls

PAGE 51

42 this situation "the biggest loophole in getting the faculty involved in an Employee Assistance Program," (p. 61) i.e., through job performance. 2. Most tenured faculty cannot be dismissed except through budgetary strictures or moral turpitude. 3. Relationships between faculty and their supervisors (chairmen or deans) are usually more colleague-friend than supervisor-employee in nature. Also, in many departments the chairmanship is rotated among the faculty. 4. Persons in the professions, especially in the medical profession, are very protective and would generally prefer to try to handle problem faculty among themselves rather than referring to a university wide program. Wrich (1977) asserts that the differences between industry and higher education are no greater than among industries themselves or among universities themselves. For example, there is a vast difference between the University of Minnesota (40,000-50,000 students) and St. John's University (1,000 students). As another example, he points out that the University of Missouri has rotating department chairmen, but the Burlington Northern and the Soo Line railroads have crews with rotating supervisors. All three have occupational programs. Likewise, just as faculty lack welldefined job descriptions, so do many other professional positions: lawyers, researchers, and therapists. Wrich also claims that if businesses can fail because of personnel

PAGE 52

43 problems, so can university departments or even universities themselves once word gets around that they are not functioning. Roman (1978) cites measurement of job performance as a serious barrier to implementing a performance based program among faculty. Productivity and creativity in the university setting do not lend themselves to ordinal scales, and teaching effectiveness has not been measurable since goals and outcomes of teaching remain unclear. The result is that only the more obvious indicators of the most serious problems — chronic absenteeism, very bizarre behavior, and so on, signify declining performance. Roman also describes the "guild-like" behavior of faculty as a more or less exclusive club. Separated from outsiders, there is a high tolerance and even encouragement of eccentric behavior, so that only the most extreme acts are likely to cause confrontation by a supervisor. Belasco and Trice (1969) warn of assuming that tolerant attitudes toward mental difficulties and alcoholism increase the chances for confrontation and referral; rather the opposite is the case: less tolerant attitudes produce confrontation-related action. The evidence here is that the lower the tolerance of the supervisor for deviant behavior, the greater his willingness to confront, and consequently, the more likely the employee will receive needed help. Positive attitudes on the part of supervisors toward

PAGE 53

44 deviant employees considerably diminish the likelihood of confrontation and of the employee's receiving help. The aim of effective training, then, is to diminish the tolerance of supervisors toward deviant employees. Trice and Roman report that lack of social distance between supervisor and subordinate is probably the chief reason for the high tolerance often shown toward deviant drinking. Roman notes that studies by Trice and Beyer (1977) indicate that the greater the social distance between supervisor and employee, the greater the likelihood of confrontation with problem-drinking employees. But, of course, department chairmen are more like peers, leading Roman to conclude that the social distance between chairpersons and their subordinates is extremely low, that relatively weak supervision of faculty is an institutionalized part of academic life, and that the likelihood of confrontation and crisis precipitation in such circumstances is indeed low. (1978, p. 126) Roman also points out that two incentives to supervisory action regarding poor performers normally present in industry are absent from the university setting. These are the evaluation of the supervisor based on output and the assumption that supervisors will perform their management duties well enough to merit a promotion. Universities do not have output and production goals, and many chairmen do not desire to move higher up the administrative ladder.

PAGE 54

45 Roman adds that all of these forces that work against supervisory referral also militate against peer referral, so that peer referrals also would not be a good mechanism for early identification. Finally, universities share with industry the disadvantages of constructive confrontation in general. According to Trice and Roman, this strategy has several weaknesses; high-status employees are often nearly immune to confrontation; very low status employees may have little to lose and so the essential ingredient in provoking a crisis is missing; poor job performance may be difficult to observe and document; the "helping," rehabilitative part of the program may be passed over too quickly in favor of negative sanctions; and sometimes a crisis will provoke suicide in particularly vulnerable individuals. Outside Resources Not all of the factors determining the success of a college or university Employee Assistance Program exist on the campus, or for that matter, within an industry. In their symposium on the relationship between an Employee Assistance Program and treatment services in the community, Masi et al. (1977) warn that the success or failure of these outside services can determine the success or failure of the campus program. Particular attention should be paid to the structural conditions of the outside resource and its

PAGE 55

46 ability to meet the demands of changing funding sources in the future. In other words, is it managed and funded in a sound and stable manner or is it going from one crisis to another? Does it have a staff, a setting, and an approach sensitive to the particular sensitivities of university clients, or is it a product of tunnel vision, isolated in the community and unconcerned about the individual needs of its clients? Masi and her staff at Boston College interviewed treatment resources in the Boston area to determine the best services to which to refer their clients. Their experience was that private counseling associations with a mixture of professional and para-professional personnel were their best resources. Masi includes representatives of these groups on the Faculty-Staff Assistance Program advisory board. Another crucial issue is whether a community resource is capable of handling alcohol problems successfully and yet able to handle all the other sorts of problems people have — marital, family and financial. Many agencies do not have both capabilities. Roman (1977b) points out a serious danger in talking too glibly about available "community resources." Many community agencies are understaffed, underfunded, do not have experience with university personnel, do not have competent staff, and/or do not command much respect in the community. In such cases, what he calls "high status clients," i.e..

PAGE 56

47 university faculty and professionals, will simply not use these resources. Given these potential problems, it does seem possible to be overly skeptical concerning the reliability of community resources and of taking an elitist view of university personnel. Perhaps it is enough to say that, before use, every community resource should be checked carefully as to staffing credentials, success rates, and reputation. Prevention and Development Gordon identifies the main thrust of an occupational program as "pre-treatment , " actually divorced from treatment altogether. Although he does not use the word, "prevention" seems to be what he is talking about, and it is a concept that ought to find particularly fertile soil on the campus, even more so than in the corporation, because of the developmental nature of the university. White cites several goals for the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program. The first is being met, in his opinion: orienting employees and supervisors as to how the program can provide assistance, and handling the particular concerns of employees, families, and supervisors. This program is also moving toward a second goal, which he describes as "preventive, health oriented." It involves opportunities for faculty and employee enhancement not promoted as programs for the identified troubled employee but offered

PAGE 57

48 as activities available for those that look to exceed their present output, to become renewed in their career efforts, or to heighten their enjoyment of life. (1977, pp. 4-5) He points out that this second goal serves to strengthen the first in that it provides troubled employees with socially acceptable reasons for seeking help. The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program uses the term "developmental model" to embody this unique aspect of a university employee assistance program as well as those elements it has in common with industrial programs. Thoresen (1977) describes the developmental approach as the raison de'etre of the university. Building on Bauning and Kaiser's (1974) ecosystem model, this approach provides for the intersection of remediation on the one hand, and personal and institutional enrichment on the other. As a method, it provides a framework described by Brofenbrenner (1977) to deal with a hitherto ignored area of developmental psychology — the productive or middle years of one's life — an area particularly appropriate for an increasingly middle-aged faculty. Thoresen summarizes his developmental model in this way (It) a) fits the unique developmental characteristics of the university, b) meets the diverse needs found in university communities, c) properly identifies the university as an ecosystem, d) stresses primary and secondary prevention in alcohol abuse and alcoholism, and e) fits my particular need for variety and change along with a basic thread of continuity. (1977, p. 71)

PAGE 58

49 Roman (1978) also suggests two areas where a University Employee Assistance Program might effectively work to prevent serious problems likely to develop among faculty. One is in the area of career peaking, where faculty gain tenure fairly early in their career and are left with nowhere else to go on the career ladder. This situation may actually be seen as a transition phase from tentative to full membership in the university community, during which some sort of career counseling program, perhaps involving faculty who have successfully made such a transition, could be helpful. The second area of possible intervention is with younger faculty who are currently experiencing tremendous pressures to perform well — much more than their seniors — because of the intense competition for advancement within the organization. Counseling could conceivably relieve some of this stress and become a useful program element. Finally, Knocke (Thornsen, et al., 1977) points out that an Employee Assistance Program provides training benefits to the university that may be unforeseen but should not be overlooked. These include a heightened awareness of employees as a valuable resource, the importing of management and training skills through outside consultants, and a heightened awareness of supervisory responsibilities, particularly in the academic area.

PAGE 59

50 Belasco and Trice (1969) have thoroughly documented the benefits of such training from industry. Although the expected changes that particular training sessions were sup posed to produce — such as an increased understanding of alcoholism — did not usually materialize, unanticipated change did emerge: identification with the organization, a change in self-concept, and a boost in morale. Most supervisors had been appointed with no training, and the willingness of the organization to put time and effort — in phone calls, memos, and the training sessions themselves — into helping them do their job enabled them to identify with their manager status and feel a part of the organization. In other words, there was a closer identification with their supervisory role and a feeling the organization cared. Additionally, supervisors were able to break out of their traditional isolation and form strong bonds with other supervisors whom they found experienced the same problems and frustrations they themselves did. In fact, training produced a strong sense of community in an otherwise impersonal organization, with many supervisors requesting ongoing groups for supervisors. Reichman advises putting the Employee Assistance Program training program into the context of faculty development, much as industry does with its supervisory training programs. This kind of structuring institutionalizes the EAP within a larger university framework and offers a wide

PAGE 60

51 variety of different approaches to programs and faculty interests, whether by age, interest, discipline, or career development. Implementing an Occupational Program Roman (1978) claims that it makes a great deal of difference how an occupational program is implemented. The method of implementation will determine the patterning of the program when it actually begins functioning. The method is in turn usually determined by the program's goals, such as reducing absenteeism and reaching alcoholics, which are implicit in the rationale for implementing the program in the first place. It follows then that the method of implementation is based on program goals and program rationale. Six Elements of Program Implementation Given the goals and rationale of the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program stated on pp. 25-26 and 49, Thoresen (1977) offers a blueprint for program implementation based on the University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program experience. He identifies six key elements : 1. In order to have a viable program it is necessary to gain the support of high level university administration, provide maximum exposure and credibility to the program and

PAGE 61

52 we believe, to maintain a constant focus on this program as a resource of the University that has been developed to meet the health care needs of valued University employees, (p. 33) Thoresen points out that a crucial factor here is the placement of the program within the university hierarchy. It was decided to place the University of Missouri program under the Office of the Provost for Health Affairs. This action served to focus on the health care of employees; placed the program in a relatively neutral cont3S>ct politically, i.e., one level above both academic and non-academic departments; and provided maximxam exposure and credibility. Other locations considered were the Personnel Office; however, the Employee Assistance Program might then be viewed as disciplinary action. Likewise, if placed in Administration, the Program might then be viewed as simply a form of fiscal and budgetary control, and if placed in the Chancellor's office, the Program might then be viewed as being for the academic faculty only, or more likely, an attempt to exercise coercive control over academic and administrative employees. In terms of administrative control over a university program, Thoresen concludes: Thus it would be our first suggestion that careful attention be given to the placement of the University Employee Assistance Program within an administrative division that is likely to give it a voice at the upper

PAGE 62

53 administrative levels, provide maximum exposure and credibility and maintain a focus upon health care needs of university employees, (p. 34) Thoresen offers a second important element: 2. A second element of a viable program is to establish an administrative framework that will both provide solid high level administrative support and emphasize the preeminence of employee rights. (p. 34) The University of Missouri approach was to develop a two-tiered system of advisory groups. One group, the Coordinating Council, was made up of dean and provost-level personnel, providing high level administrative support. The other, the Advisory Committee, was composed of all groups to be served by the program: academic and non-academic, supervisory, secretarial, and labor. The Advisory Committee oversees the day-to-day operations of the program and makes recommendations to the Coordinating Council, which in turn serves in an advisory capacity. Notice that the information flow is from the bottom up, rather than from the top down . Thoresen et al. reiterates, "It is critical to the success of a University Employee Assistance Program to have the key university administrators view this as their program" (1977 , p. 35) . Because the University of Missouri program is located in the Provost for Health Affairs' office, across the hall from the Chancellor's office, and the Provost sits on the

PAGE 63

54 Council of Deans and the President's Cabinet, Employee Assistance Program personnel are able to meet with all major administrative groups . These groups include not only the Council of Deans and the President's Cabinet, but also the Faculty Council, the staff of the Provost for Administration, the staff of Student Affairs, the administrative staff of the School of Medicine, and Executive Committee of all the major divisions. In addition, the Chancellor is a staunch supporter, and monthly meetings with him and the Provost are held to keep them informed of progress and to request advice on important issues regarding the program, such as how and what to pviblicize, the policy statement, and involvement with other campuses in Kansas City, Rolla and St. Louis. 3. The third element of a viable program is to have the project located in a building that is in close proximity to the University and in an office that includes separate and legitimate (sic) academic functions as a part of the office activities. (p. 36) Thoresen's concern here is for the safety and anonymity of referrals. The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program is located in a professional building adjacent to campus that also houses the credit union, physicians, dentists, attorneys, and university research projects. The title on the door is not only "University Employee Assistance Program" but also "Rehabilitation

PAGE 64

55 Counselor Education Program," thus linking the Employee Assistance Program to another academic program and providing further anonymity for those who use the program. 4. The fourth element of University Employee Assistance Program is appropriate liaison with community mental health and drug and alcoholism agencies. (p. 37) The University of Missouri approach here was to affiliate with the alcohol and drug referral network in the midMissouri area. In addition, university staff met with the staff of their primary referral agency. Family Counseling and Education in Alcoholism, and representatives of the Missouri Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse on the neutral ground of Division offices in Jefferson City. This procedure served the twofold purposes of keeping division representatives informed and working out the issues and problems of coordination with the primary referral agency. 5. The fifth element of a viable program is the linkage of the University Employee Assistance Program with a community based treatment agency that has a primary focus on alcoholism education and treatment and yet has sufficient diversity of treatment goals to handle the "broad brush" clientele of the University Employee Assistance Program, (pp. 37-38) The University of Missouri Employee Assistance Program felt strongly that the nature of the program excluded inhouse treatment, through the University Counseling Services,

PAGE 65

56 for example, or the Department of Psychiatry or the MidMissouri Mental Health Center. This approach promotes referrals from a variety of sources and provides clear limits of the responsibilities of staff by disassociating them from treatment. Facilitating the use of the multiple referral network is particularly important, because it is assumed that white collar and managerial employees (such as those found in a university community) are implicitly rather than explicitly motivated, and a multiple referral network is necessary for voluntary, low-coercive, referrals (self or family, friend, co-worker, or supervisory induced) wherein deterioration in job performance, although it may be present does not constitute the basis for the referral to the University Employee Assistance Program, (pp. 38-39) Thoresen makes three related sub-recommendations here, all of which relate to the importance of emphasizing through publicity the formal, industrial model with non-academic staff to enhance credibility with academic faculty and managers. Also through publicity, the staff should encourage self and peer referrals. Public information activity builds upon the intrinsic motivation necessary for self-referrals and increases the awareness required for peer referrals. 6. The sixth element to a viable program is to build upon the unique characteristics of a university community. (p. 39)

PAGE 66

57 Thoresen notes that everyone involved, personnel, administration, and the union, would like to control the program. "The trick is to enable participation by all and control by none" (1977, p. 40). Program evaluation includes goals, objectives, and concrete programmatic ideas that may be useful for other institutions of higher education. The evaluation is also designed to provide suitable thesis or other research projects for students, again taking advantage of the unique characteristics of the academic community. The structure and procedures of the program, then, are particularly keyed to the academic community, by means of "1) the multiple referral system, 2) the two-tiered system of governance of the project, 3) the low-key project publicity, and 4) the program evaluation model" (1977, p. 41). In summary, Thoresen contends that an Employee Assistance Program can be made to w ork on any university campus. It only requires an elaboration over the traditional, univariate industrial model depending mainly on supervisory referrals to a multivariate system that offers multiple points of entry by the different constituent groups. And, as with any successful program, it requires a well thought-out plan of action and a willingness on the part of the project staff to face the controversy that regularly and inevitably goes with any program that does something. (1976,

PAGE 67

58 Program Implementation at Boston College Dale Masi (1978) , director of the Boston College program, has pointed out a number of factors which must be considered in implementing a program on campus: 1) The proper designation of the program is vital. Boston College President J. Donald Moran, S.J., observed that faculty do not usually see themselves as employees; accordingly, he suggested "Faculty-Staff Assistance Program". An additional problem involves the work, "assistance". Some staff were concerned over the association of "assistance" with welfare. 2) Faculty should be emphasized from the beginning. Masi's strategy here was to win over faculty first, then other staff, thinking that the reverse would not be likely to occur. Interestingly, junior faculty were certain that it would be senior faculty who used the program because they had the security of tenure, and senior faculty were convinced it would be junior faculty because they had the most problems. Apparently both were right, and recently there has been an increase in use by junior and senior faculty and their families. 3) An Advisory Committee on the Collegial Model is a necessity. The Boston College program staff recruited one faculty memger from each college plus representatives from the personnel office, the unions, the affirmative action office, and clerical and custodial staffs to form a

PAGE 68

59 guiding coiranittee which has met monthly for three years. Although at first reluctant participants, after constructing and sending a questionnaire around campus to determine need, they have become the program's chief advocates. Masi strongly recommends such a committee. 4) A faculty questionnaire is a good beginning. The Boston College questionnaire provided concrete evidence of the need for the campus Employee Assistance Program. It also strengthened committee members ' commitment, as a result of responses to such questions as the following: (Is there) a basic need for an Employee Assistance Program? Is alcohol abuse or other mental health matters a real problem? If the service were available, would people use it? Lastly, should it be strictly voluntary or used as a referral in cases where work performance has declined? (1978, p. 22) Masi elaborates on this questionnaire and its results. Direct questions were avoided, she notes, since they might elicit misleading answers. Instead, faculty were asked to rate the extent to which they thought various problems might affect job performance. Significantly, alcohol and mental health problems received moderate ratings from younger respondents, with the higher ratings coming from faculty with more seniority. Also, faculty were given a case history and asked to react to various options. Ninety-eight percent rejected the option of non-involvement, implying endorsement of some sort of referral process. Seventy-six

PAGE 69

60 percent approved involvement by the department chairperson; fifty percent, by a colleague. The rate of return for the questionnaire was high — 4 0% responded. In addition to providing answers for the committee, the questionnaire was also used to inform faculty indirectly of how the program might be used, to educate them on the signs of poor job performance, and to suggest the beneficial effects of an Employee Assistance Program. In addition, it generated the beginnings of an oncampus helping network among faculty on the committee. 5) Self-referrals should be emphasized and all types of employee problems given equal weight in program publicity. Masi claims the supervisory referral model will not work with faculty. But, she asserts, "faculty are highly motivated persons. They are achievers and want to succeed. As a result, they are used to seeking help and often will come in and ask for assistance" (1978,p.26). Alcohol problems can be spotted by skilled counselors, and Masi uses what she calls "education sessions" with groups around campus to discuss the program and views on alcohol and other drugs. 6) Faculty and staff should be offered the same benefits offered to students: a comprehensive campus counseling program, so that the Employee Assistance Program is not just a "refer-out" program.

PAGE 70

61 Program Implementation at Rutgers Ann K. Baxter, Director of the Personnel Counseling Service at Rutgers, agrees with Masi that the name for a university Employee Assistance Program is important. In her view, faculty see themselves as members of an academic community, with its own collegial structure entirely separate from the personnel office. "Assistance" also had the connotation of "financial aid" that it did for Masi's staff. Consequently, the Rutgers program staff avoided those words altogether in the program's name, the University Personnel Counseling Service (UPCS) . Problems which faced the UPCS included the following: (1) utilization, insuring that faculty as well as non-academic staff would use the program; (2) training, setting up an effective training system for supervisors; and (3) confidentiality, making sure that the program was strictly confidential and perceived in that way. One way UPCS resolved the utilization problem was to give careful attention to where the program was located organizationally, i.e., "out of the political arena and not subordinated to academic, research, or training concerns" (3978, p.35). Political neutrality was achieved by placing the service under the Vice President for University Personnel, where

PAGE 71

62 the Service operates autonomously in respect to all personnel, as well as academic, aspects of the University, both functionally and geographically. As Director, I am accountable to the Vice President for University Personnel only in matters of fiscal and statistical reporting. (Baxter, 1978, p. 35) In addition to careful placement within the organization, it was thought that Unlike many blue collar workers, many academics tend to be rather sophisticated in matters of mental health, and thus favorably inclined toward seeking the services of mental health professionals. This has been demonstrated in a number of studies of health and mental health service utilization. (Proceedings, 23rd Annual Group Health Institute, Boston, MA, June 25-28, 1973. Group Health Association, Inc., p. 89) (1978, p. 36) Faculty, then, might more readily self -refer. Peer referral was also thought to be a good possibility. Recognizing the conflict that many faculty might feel, however, between a wish to help a fellow faculty member on humanitarian grounds and a wish to preserve a certain reputation for their department, program staff prepared literature which presented a preventive emphasis, suggesting early intervention rather than rehabilitation. In setting up an effective supervisory training program, UPCS rejected the "constructive coercion" of industrial programs "in favor of sessions directed toward development of self-understanding and sensitivity to problems of peers and subordinates" (Baxter, 1978, p. 37). In fact, UPCS refused to

PAGE 72

63 become involved in supervisory training designed to teach people to become better supervisors in order to avoid identification of the program with other personnel functions and, therefore, less attractive to faculty members. In order to insure and enhance confidentiality, the University Personnel Counseling Service excluded participation by students, refused to set up an advisory board, and sought out a separate physical location from Personnel operations. UPCS was also aware that it was dealing with a population some of whose members were extremely litigious and would not hesitate to sue if they thought their privacy had been violated. Even so, their present evaluation of the matter is that they underestimated their clients' desire for privacy, since there are many requests for afterhours appointments. Baxter found the use of the questionnaire at Boston College to be an excellent strategy but pointed out that Rutgers was so large as to make that approach impractical and cost-prohibitive on its campus. The size factor (about 10,000 employees) also deterred the University Personnel Counseling Service from employing the Advisory Committee approach. In addition to the problem of size and the concern for confidentiality mentioned above, it was feared that such a committee might too easily become politicized and factionalized. UPCS relied instead on the competency of its own staff to develop the service and on the Vice

PAGE 73

64 President for University Personnel, a cabinet-level officer, as the program's sole advocate. Since the beginning of the program in September, 1974, UPCS has found an advisory committee to be unnecessary. Other Considerations in Program Implementation The Rutgers program is unique in eschewing an advisory committee. It differs not only from the University of Missouri and the Boston College Programs, but also from the program at the Rochester Institute of Technology, where key implementation strategy was based on a committee. The original RIT planning committee, consisting of representatives from the departments of Personnel, Social Work, Campus Services, Communications Services, and the Counseling Center , became a standing advisory committee after the implementation of the RIT Employee Assistance Program. Its purpose is to develop and disseminate educational materials about the program, work with community agencies and develop procedures for referral, and recommend needed changes for the improvement of the program. Because of confidentiality, it is not involved with individual cases, but rather concerns itself with policy and procedure. In making general suggestions for beginning a campus program, Wrich (1977) reiterates much of what has been mentioned already. He warns again against overestimating the capability of community resources and advises looking carefully

PAGE 74

65 at what they can really do as opposed to what they say they can do. Above all, Wrich recommends forming a committee of concern with broad representation from all levels of the organization, and working through the processes already established within the organization. Only in this way, says Wrich, can the concensus necessary for the success of the program be achieved. Wrich also advises giving careful attention to the selection and location, organizationally and geographically, of program staff, and setting limits to the program, avoiding oversell. In addition to teaching supervisors what can be done when someone has a personal problem, Wrich advocates involving family members who can often have a greater impact on individuals than supervisors, especially if they are a part of the problem. The Role of Organized Labor Another consideration in implementing an Employee Assistance Program is the absolute necessity for full participation and cooperation of any organized labor groups within the organization. Gordon says, "An agreement between labor and management, in a completely coordinated effort to achieve mutual objectives, is vital to the success of this type of program approach" (1973, p. 28). Concerning unions. Trice and Roman assert flatly: An established fact of industrial relations is that management programs involving employee

PAGE 75

66 welfare must have the full consent and cooperation of the labor union or other employee organizations if they are to be effective and durable (Belasco et al., 1969). This is especially true of programs designed to deal with deviant drinking and drug use. Union-management cooperation and mutual support are essential in such programs when he is confronted with a deviant drinker or drug user. Indeed, the absence of union cooperation may destroy the best designed programs for the management of deviance. (1972, p. 197) They further point out that it is essential for union representatives to be explicitly aware of the assumptions and definitions of troubled employee programs. The reasoning behind these programs must be shared by both labor and management, and there must be agreement on the benefit to employees. A "consensus in confronting and handling such an employee is essential for a successful prograirf' (1972, p. 200) In addition, there must be a true company-wide policy: A successful program to deal with this problem cannot be directed solely at union members or blue-collar employees; the rules and procedures must apply to all individuals in the organization. Unions feel a justifiable reluctance to cooperate in a program which sets guidelines for behavior which, in effect, apply only to union members. (1972, pp. 200-201) George Boyle (Besch, et al., 1977) Director of the Labor Education Program for organized trade unions in Missouri, cites three reasons for union support of occupational programs: 1) the humanitarian reason that it saves jobs for workers with problems;

PAGE 76

67 2) problem employees are problems not only for the employer but also for the union, since the union may have to defend them, and must be concerned about the rights of other workers who might be forced to assume extra workloads, endangered by unsafe practices, or personally harassed by problem employees; 3) recent court decisions hold the union liable for the completeness and competence of an employee's defense . An occupational program involves working conditions and discipline, clearly union bailiwicks. Union support is essential since the status of the union as a representative of the employee is involved, and opposition would mean grievances over referrals and employee reluctance to self -refer to a program the union does not support. On the other hand, shop stewards and fellow employees are usually the first to identify an employee's declining performance, enjoy a special relationship with the employee which the supervisor may not, and can advise the employee of the union's difficulty in defending him should poor performance persist. In addition, working as a team with the Employee Assistance Program, the steward and the supervisor can form a healthy alliance in other areas, rather than the all too frequent adversarial one.

PAGE 77

68 Trice and Roman are optimistic about union involvement and cooperation. There are problems to be sure, centered around the political nature of top union officials and the potential for intra-union differences, especially between those in staff positions and those in line positions, or between local and regional officers. The union is committed to the protection and aid of all its members, but typically has no way of handling the deviant employee so his problems can be controlled and resolved. Recognition of the double binds produced when union officials face a deviant employee may possibly motivate joint union-management participation in such programs. (1972, p. 203) In addition, citing Whyte (1969, p. 472), Trice and Roman point out that the "most thoroughly demonstrated proposition on human relations in industry" is the dual loyalty of employees to their union and to management, and of management to the union as part of the organization, as well as to themselves. These interconnecting loyalties imply the possibility of a strong grassroots support for troubled employee programs. Trice and Roman note significantly that shared understanding between management and labor requires open channels of communication and trust on both sides: "The overall tone of cooperation between union and management in a local situation is probably an excellent predictor of success or failure in this specific endeavor" (1972, p. 203).

PAGE 78

69 Nevertheless, they assert that though cooperation may be stymied on all other fronts, informal cooperation where it matters most, between stewards and front-line supervisors, is still possible because of this positive grassroots attitude, offering hope for an official policy and a program that is an eventual necessity. The Top Executive A final point may be reiterated concerning the implementation of an Employee Assistance Program. If union cooperation is necessary for a successful program, support of the top executive is no less so. Roman (1975) points out that support of the top executive is essential not only in initiating an occupational program, but also in sustaining it. It is management that will determine the future of a program, whether it will be sustained and expanded, and the extent to which it will become an integral, working part of the organization. Thoresen and Schooling have both said, in remarks at the 1978 Conference on Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education, that without the active support and involvement of the top executive, an Employee Assistance Program simply cannot be successful.

PAGE 79

70 Beyond the Industrial Model; Theoretical Approaches to Occupational Programs in Higher Education Occupational programming may be thought of as a forthright people-helping-people program, however true all the talk about saving money for industry and producing better quality work. Wrich (1978) implies as much when he suggests that the impact of occupational programs set up by universities is conceivably greater on the community at large than all the money the federal government can spend on its own efforts at promoting such programs. Ultimately, these programs help not only the individuals directly involved but the community as a whole by breaking down the cultural fiction of the rugged individualist and demonstrating the inter-relatedness and interdependence of us all. The impact of a university occupational program on the community is certainly of potential value. But what about its impact upon the university? Stated another way the question might be, how does an occupational program fit with the mission and function of a university? Impact on Environment Wrich says that regardless of the work setting. Employee Assistance Programs are set up to help people with problems. Whether those problems are alcoholism or something else, the important thing is not what the program is called or the length of training, but whether an environment

PAGE 80

71 is created that will encourage "voluntary referrals." Such an environment means a stress on elements that will create trusting relationships within the work environment; a nonpunitive program policy, complete confidentiality, absence of labels within the program, such as "alcoholism counselor" or "mental health counselor," and a wide latitude of choices for action for those who seek help. Williamson (1975) identifies just such an approach as the chief criterion of educational effectiveness, which he calls arete , or humane development, and he adds that parents of students and other publics should expect no less. If this concept may be likened to Crookston's (1975a) "human development," which he posits as a component of the university, then two broad institutional goals follow: "the actualization of the individual — student, faculty, staff and others — and the actualization of the institution through the process of continuous renewal." (p. 372) These are precisely the goals of an occupational program within an institution of higher education. Crookston goes on to say that it is imperative that an organization with these goals — which he calls an "actualizing organization" — become among other things, flexible. It may not be content to modify the tasks of the organization to suit the organization itself, as in a bureaucracy, but rather the tasks must flow from the organization's goals. In a masterpiece of understatement, he suggests that "Many

PAGE 81

72 of the old bureaucratic assumptions about the nature of work need to be challenged" (1975a, p. 372). The actualizing organization is not only flexible, however. In another statement that is almost a paraphrase of Wrich, above, Crookston cites Gibb (1964) as follows: Research tells us that other key ingredients of an actualizing organization are a climate of acceptance and trust, an open communications system, effective data-flow linkage with other groups, and a system of control that optimizes individual freedom and creativity. (1975a, p. 371) Crookston (1975b) also describes this approach to organization as working in the symbiotic mode. The goals of the symbiotic more are the process itself, rather than an actual product or end-point, multi-dimensional and expanding rather than linear and static. " Thus , " according to Crookston, " in human development theory, the ends are als o the means " (1975b, p. 49). This theory implies that everyone is involved. thinking of a health service for all, not just students, a library for all, counseling for all, life planning programs for all, organization development, and human development for all. The MM (Milieu Manager) must have the authority to impact all components of the campus, to have a significant role in the staff and human development of all employees. (1975b, p. 54) One caution needs to be made about the university as a human development organization creating a climate of trust

PAGE 82

73 where those who need it will seek help. Roman (1976) warns that Employee Assistance Programs which rely heavily on self-referral are in great danger of ignoring highly stigmatic problems like alcoholism, which require a " system of identification and referral based on job performance." (p. 19) Alcoholics require a crisis precipitation before they are likely to seek help, and that comes earlier, if it comes at all, from outside the person — for example, from the work place. An argument could well be made that exclusively self-referral systems are no systems at all. This fact leads to no contradiction in a human development organization since a performance-based program assumes not only the supervisor's responsibility to the organization but also to the individual working with and under him or her. If it is granted that the occupational program concept is particularly appropriate for the university as a human development organization, it remains to determine what form the concept will take in institutions of higher education. The more traditional industrial model has been seen to have many short-comings in such a setting, and those implementing programs in higher education have had to modify and improvise to accommodate a different setting. It is quickly admitted that problems still remain. The precise form of occupational programming in institutions of higher education is not yet fully evolved.

PAGE 83

74 However, it is hoped that this study will contribute to that evolution, and the theorists do suggest directions that seem particularly promising for programs in higher education. Organizational Issues Roman (1975) describes the need for a "two-track program," one that recognizes real differences between lower levels of the organization and upper or mid-levels. Three facts . . . are clear: First, referrals will rarely be made downward in an organizational structure; second, the appropriate types of training materials and emphases for supervisory implementation of program guidelines may be different in the upper and lower levels of the organization; third, there is considerable doubt that the same referral outlets for counseling or treatment are equally attractive or appropriate to persons at different levels in the organization, particulary in light of the intense concerns over confidentiality that accompany a problem employee in the middle or upper level echelons of the organization, (p. 314) He adds that specialized program strategies are necessary to include management and executives in an occupational program, but does not elaborate. Roman (1977b) stresses careful attention to the program's placement within the university bureaucracy. As others have argued, Roman points out that placement of university Employee Assistance Program in the personnel department would be a serious mistake. Rather, he recommends placing the program in the medical school, if one exists.

PAGE 84

75 or in an academic department, but at any rate in the line structure of the organization where staff tend to be of at least equal status to university faculty. The University of Missouri placement of the program in the Department of Rehabilitation Counseling is ideal in that it is in an academic department with close ties to the medical school, providing status, association with the medical model which is necessary in treating alcoholism, and clear identification with counseling through this particular department. Roman (1978) says that the central problem of implementing an Employee Assistance Program in a university is one of the professions generally. He notes that universities share the problems of program implementation with certain other institutions dependent on professional staffs, such as hospitals and research laboratories. The sociology of the professions is not very well known, especially when professionals organize to work together or try to administer each other. Significantly, occupational programmers have had little success in attempting to implement programs in professional organizations. Once again, transplanting the traditional industrial model with its emphasis on supervisory control and quantitative evaluation into an organization where those characteristics are nearly non-existent is not adequate. If it is known, then, what referrals will come only from the organizational level of the program and below, but

PAGE 85

76 not from above, then, where faculty are concerned, departments which are below faculty status are to be avoided, and the most logical group to run the program are faculty themselves. Likewise treatment specialists outside the institution should be of equal rank with faculty. Roman concludes that institutions with the most faculty independence provide the greatest challenge to implementing an effective program, but "if decisions regarding structure and design of programming are left to the faculty with the guidance of expert outsiders, the likelihood of effective adaptations to local conditions rises sharply" (1978, pp. 127129) . Trice and Roman provide a conceptual framework wherein a faculty program might be established. It could be called "the small company concept." In describing approaches open to small companies. Trice and Roman liken these companies to the major institutions of a service economy: hospitals, government agencies, research institutes, professional organizations, and universities. Although they do not further articulate the likeness, it becomes apparent in their description of the small company; varying numbers and levels of employees and supervision, variance in the strictness or looseness of control by a parent organization or in the control exerted by any trade organizations to which they may belong. Small companies usually do not have large internal resources, such as a

PAGE 86

77 medical or personnel departments, and their organization is less formal; often there is a "family" atmosphere. This is often the case with the departments and divisions of major service institutions. Much is dependent on the personalities of those who own or manage these organizations, which in turn tend to be highly individualized. Interestingly, they conclude that, with fewer staff to screen and select new employees, the alcoholic employee may be found in equal or greater numbers than in the large corporation . Surely this is an apt description of the university department or college, which this writer has heard referred to as "fiefdoms" by others in higher education. Such administrative units are part of a large bureaucracy, to be sure, but in many important ways they are separate and independent, characterized by the predominating personalities of a dean, chairman, or prominent faculty member. University departments have other similarities to small companies. Policies, for example, that managers of small companies genuinely want carried out can be accomplished without superfluous communication or the rhetorical "lip service" to irrelevant ideals that sometimes characterizes a larger bureaucracy. Conversely, because of the personalized nature of the organization, work performance confrontation may be delayed or carried out only with great reluctance. Such conditions certainly are characteristic

PAGE 87

75 of many university departments. Trice and Roman (1972) point out that this permissiveness makes it difficult for employees in small organizations to get the help they need. Managers of these small organizations, on the other hand, are probably in the best position to coordinate the carrying out of policy with the spouses of troubled employees, because of the familial, personalized atmosphere. A manager who will not confront an employee who is also an old friend will often go to a spouse when he/she believes that employee needs help. A manager in a family-like organization, then, can often have a greater impact when a confrontation does take place. Given the initial resistance to action on the part of supervisors of small organizational subgroups, the direct and immediate involvement of department chairmen and college deans, who act as supervisors in the university setting, becomes essential in a faculty-run program. Not coincidentally, Roman (1978) advocates the committee approach, on the basis of research by Fromkin and Sherwood (1974), which indicates that supervisors give greater support to policy when they are actually involved in its formulation, and the more involvement, the more support. Role of a Change Agent A university occupational program based on the small company concept fits well with Roman's requirement for a

PAGE 88

79 "network of change agents" 097SI, p. 122). Roman does not define exactly what he means by "change agent," but he appears to refer to an individual whose responsibility it is to alter the status quo when the needs of another individual and the effectiveness of the organization demand it. Roman describes the development of an occupational program as a linkage of change agents, usually initiated by an external change agent and carried through with the cooperation of an internal change agent. These change agents usually then rely on supervisory training for implementation of the program. But Roman contends that reliance on training in a program with a single coordinator (usually part-time) is unworkable in a large and complex university system. Rather, "a network of change agents, linked to the original inside and outside change agents and spanning all levels and divisions of the organization, is essential for program success" (1978, p. 122). These internal change agents are policy experts who act as consultants and referral agents within their areas of responsibility. This strategy relieves supervisors of the need of becoming experts on the whole program. It also reduces the distance between supervisors who wish to seek help and the helpers, or local change agents, since the change agents are organizationally very close to the supervisors. A readily available consultant makes it easier

PAGE 89

80 for them to take action to relieve their own anxiety over what to do with a problem employee. When change agents are part of the line structure of the organization, supervisors may better understand that use of the program is part of their job expectations. The change agent network also builds a broad-based constituency of support for the program through the change agents themselves . In an earlier work, Roman (1977b) had suggested that a peer referral system has the greatest potential for success. He suggests utilizing a professional organization, such as the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) , as California lawyers have done with their professional association. This procedure has the advantage of permitting colleagues to deal with colleagues and minimizes involvement by university management. But faculty belong to so many diverse organizations that it is difficult to see how this approach through professional organizations would work in practice. A network of change agents, however, composed of faculty and integral to the organization and structure of the university could achieve the desired peer referral effect on the local campus level. Importance of Consultation Crookston (1975a) identifies four skills as necessary to implement the goals of a human development organization:

PAGE 90

81 teaching, training, consultation, and evaluation. In another place (1975b) , he says that the strategies necessary to create an atmosphere conducive to a sionbiotic community are consultation, organization development methodologies, and training programs. Although all of these roles are proper to the work of a change agent within the university, the one most appropriate for a change agent within the faculty/employee assistance program network may be consultation. This concept seems to fit nicely with Crookston's (1975b) description of the symbiotic community, which becomes, as it were, the heart of chief descriptor of the human development organization. In a community, power and control are vested in the membership who can use it to invent processes to achieve individual and collective goals. But community must be based on a transcendent value, one that is overeaching and held by all members, regardless of the differences of other values. Since this situation is unlikely in a large complex institution like a university, Crookston recommends focusing on the smaller, discreet communities that do exist within the institution, building these up with the goal of a related system something like a larger community of the whole. This is exactly parallel to the small company concept for an occupational program. In describing a community mental health approach for university counseling centers (as opposed to a medical

PAGE 91

82 model, treatment-oriented approach) , Conyne and Clack (1975) assert that consultation is the best counseling function for a campus environment. As ttiey develop the concept: Consultation, ... an indirect intervention between staff consultants and their consultees, is an enabling function to improve the work of consultees with their own clientele or in their own organization. In this indirect manner, the consultative process allows the consultant to have greater impact on the community by working through others and through relevant organizational structures, (p. 413) All consultation entry points described by Conyne and Clack could be considered relevant for an occupational program, although two, remedial and preventive, would logically receive the most emphasis at first. In the remedial emphasis, consultation is concerned with developing solutions to present problems, e.g., faculty and staff with existing alcohol and mental or emotional problems. These problems may center on the individual or the organization. As an example of an organization-centered problem, the authors cite the case of a food service manager who has personal problems due to inadequate training procedures, a staff performance problem that may be remedied once the manager is helped to see the need for more training.

PAGE 92

83 An Emphasis on Prevention and Humanizing the Workplace The preventive emphasis is perhaps the most important, however, with its concern for developing plans, procedures, and skills that will aid in preventing future problems from occurring. This emphasis suggests the social ecology approach of Insel and Moos (1974) with its concerns for community member-physical-social environment interactions and maximally effective human functioning. As person-environment "fits" are identified, preventive consultation may develop into a social change technology and a community directed toward Iscoe's (1974) "competent community," a community whose members are independent, psychologically growing, and competent. In this case, preventive consultation promotes developmental intervention, a proactive approach directed toward growth, where serious problems do not exist nor are expected to occur, but where consultees are provided with methods for enhancing their functioning. Rudolph (1976) calls the creation of such an environment, one responsive to a concern with values and the human experience, the challenge to higher education today" (p. 38). Echoing Brown, Rudolph sees colleges teaching values haphazardly, each new building a monument to a particular value. The counselor's office may be a sign of more human values, while the rest of the enterprise emphasizes the dehumanizing, the specialized, a "celebration of technical proficiency" (p. 39) .

PAGE 93

84 Indeed, humanizing the workplace is a challenge education shares with all the major institutions of our culture, only more so because of its role as leader and trainer of the young. In an article excerpted from the forthcoming book Work in America; The Decade Ahead (Clark Kerr and Jerome Rosow, ed.. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1978), Daniel Yankelovich describes the tremendous tension between the old cultural values of subsuming one's individuality and personality in one's job and the new values of highly personalized work. This tension presents a crisis in the world of work, where the old values dominate the workplace, cited as being "among the most conservative of our institutions" (p. 46), and the new values dominate the work force. Yankelovich points out that while self-fulfillment needs have always been given full play for top level executives, the rank and file are expected to conform to a rigid regimen of group behavior. Lip service is given to "our employees are our greatest asset and their needs come first in our organization," but "in everyday life attention is paid to everything but people — capital requirements, technology, material resources, managerial techniques, political pressures, cost controls, and markets" (p. 50). Managers who have always relied on the old carrot-and-stick of wages, fringe benefits and possible job insecurity, find themselves frustrated when these things no longer satisfy an increasingly litigious group of employees who have

PAGE 94

85 another value and reward system. Managers who understand this fact and the new value system will become the New Breed of managers in the 1980 's. Faculty Evaluation An essential component of an Employee Assistance Program is the evaluation of individual performance, and much has been made of the difficulty of applying this component in a university setting. It is a problem which has not yet been solved. However, it is important to understand some of the issues involved. An initial statement must be made about what evaluation is not. It is not what Wollansky (1976) calls the "black book" approach — the process wherein supervisors collect evidence for dismissal. If the evaluation process is to serve as a positive force and be accepted by every faculty member, he or she must perceive the benefits of the process as assisting one to improve his or her performance and being nonpunitive, (p. 81) This point is of particular importance where an occupational program is concerned because a necessary element of an Employee Assistance Program is documentation by the supervisor of an employee's performance. If this documentation is to have value to the institution and the employee, it must be intelligent, verifiable, and have the

PAGE 95

86 employee's best interests at heart. Anything less should not be tolerated in a university setting. Wollansky states that the major purposes of the evaluation of faculty in higher education are the improvement of instruction and of the total educational environment. More specifically, evaluation should: 1) Provide each faculty with an appraisal of his or her strengths and weaknesses. 2) Provide information (feedback) that encourages staff members to improve performance. Such feedback will aid the individual faculty member to overcome weaknesses and more effectively utilize one's strengths. 3) Provide an informational basis on which a number of administrative decisions can be made. 4) To determine in-service and professional growth activities for faculty members to overcome identified deficiencies. 5) Provide open communications to strengthen staff morale. (1976, pp. 81-82) Wollansky also quotes Gage's (1959) three reasons for faculty evaluation: to provide a basis for administrative decisions involving promotions, salary increases, and tenure; to provide an information base for self -improvement; and to provide a criterion for research on teaching and learning. Wollansky 's review of faculty evaluation research indicates that: 1) The roles and time allocation of faculty vary widely from institution to institution and

PAGE 96

87 department to department. 2) Students do a better job of evaluating faculty than administrators or peers. 3) "While most institutional evaluation procedures point out individual faculty deficiencies, no recommended paths for self-improvement are stated" (1976, p. 82) . Similarly, Moomaw (1977) reports on a recent study by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) of 843 postsecondary institutions in the 14 states of the Southeastern region. This study concludes that the purpose of faculty evaluation is twofold: "formative evaluation, which is designed for professional development and improvement; and summative evaluation, whose aim is to provide data with which to make decisions regarding tenure, promotions, and salary increases" (p. 78). Which type of evaluation predominates, however, tends to vary with the type of institution. For example, summative evaluation tends to predominate in doctoral level institutions, formative in the twoyear colleges. The study is quite clear that the ability of faculty evaluations to achieve stated purposes remains the greatest unknown. In fact, although most administrators were reportedly very positive about evaluation, administrators and faculty each thought they were involved in the evaluation process to serve the others' needs, indicating further

PAGE 97

88 lack of clarity regarding the purpose and consequences of an evaluation system. The SREB study also examined the elements of faculty evaluation and several models of evaluation currently in use. The findings most pertinent here, however, are the overall failure of formative evaluation to achieve its goal of faculty development and the general uninvolvement of faculty in the evaluation process. At the same time, the study reported that when faculty are involved and procedures are established and clear, evaluation is more readily accepted and morale is high. Generally held beliefs about faculty evaluation systems run contrary to these findings, however, viz . , that almost any evaluation system will somehow achieve a formative effect. An even greater discrepancy exists where siimmative evaluation is concerned in that the data used are generally considered reliable and valid. But the SREB study found that if the data are traced to their origin, they are found to be the results of unsystematic student surveys gathered in a haphazard way and, worse, hearsay and gossip accepted by department chairmen as comprehensive fact. Only two exceptions were noted in the gathering of student data, one in a doctoral level institution and one in a professional school. In these institutions student committees interview the instructor-in-question, other

PAGE 98

89 students, and other instructors, review materials and examinations, and write a comprehensive report. The department chairmen involved have adjudged these reports to be the "best source of information they have ever received" (1977, p. 82) . But these are exceptions, and Moomaw concludes by referring to the following SREB statement, "It would be particularly unfortunate if a realistic attention to institutional efficiency and effectiveness must be enforced from outside the academic community" (p. 91). If sound evaluation is eventually as unavoidable as it is desirable, could not a faculty /employee assistance program act as a catalyst to as well as component of a systematic, student/faculty evaluation process? To be considered in planning evaluation for faculty and administrators is a broad view of evaluation in general. Van de Visse (cited in Wallenfeldt, 1974) notes that the emphasis in modern evaluation is on results. This emphasis is best exemplified in the management by objectives (MBO) approach in which superior and subordinate collaborate in determining the goals and objectives on which the employee will be evaluated. This approach has grown out of certain objective concepts developed by Likert: production, turnover, profit and loss, job satisfaction. The evidence is, however, that this concept is not widely applied in education and that its application is uneven

PAGE 99

90 because administrators do not understand it or evaluation in general. Wallenfeldt asserts that there is no question that MBO is an advancement over evaluation of personality traits. However, the MBO approach is itself a development of evaluation practices in industry and the military, and the adoption of evaluation concepts from military, industrial, and government organizations is highly questionable when these organizations are themselves criticized for ineffective and inhumane evaluation practices. Referring to modern bureaucracies, Shomper and Philips have stated: There seems to be little doubt that evaluation criteria now in use are, at least in the short run, production rather than people-oriented. Considerable reorientation is necessary before people will enjoy coequal status with production . . . the degree of change required is unprecedented, involving revolutionary rather than evolutionary actions. The entire climate or state of mind of the organization must change, (pp. 29-33) Noting that accountability and evaluation in higher education are here to stay, Wallenfeldt cites two traditional methods of evaluation, measuring mechanical sets of behaviors and subjective ratings contingent upon personality biases and personal preferences. He asserts that these would be equally disastrous and inappropriate for university administrators and officials. Rather, what is needed is a broad philosophical framework as a crucial first step.

PAGE 100

91 "Philosophical-qualitative issues must be resolved before psychological-quantitative measures are considered" (1976, p. 7). The approach he suggests is a general systems theory approach, which seems consistent with the goals of a human development organization. General systems theory is described by Sutherland (1974) as a shift from inductive-empirical methods, or reductionism, to deductive modalities of openness and complexity. Systems theory requires relinquishing the assumption "that the future will be some neat and calculable product of the past" (p. 9). It offers the most comprehensive approach to judging the effectiveness of personnel in a complex environment. According to Sutherland, general systems theory generally advocates five approaches or strategies: delay of irrevocable commitments to action or monies until necessary; using time-limited, measurable objectives in planning; abandonment of bureaucratic organizational structures in favor of more versatile, ad-hoc structures; an emphasis on modular rather than hierarchical organization at all levels; and the application of disciplined learning to complex problem-solving and decision-making. Wallenfeldt also supplies a checklist of philosophical criteria by which every evaluative decision should be scrutinized: 1) Does the action consider and attempt to meet the need for safety (Maslow's primary human need)?

PAGE 101

92 2) Does the action recognize and enhance the dignity and worth of the individual? 3) Does the action assist in maintaining an environment of freedom and justice? 4) Is the action consistent with a basic belief in the potential of human individuals and their ability to solve their problems? 5) Does this action recognize and promote tolerance? 6) Does this action recognize and facilitate the right of the dissenter and help contain conflict at a functional level? 7) Does the action promote and enhance openness of mind? 8) Does the action consider and adhere to the common persuasion of free men? (1976, p. 11) These questions must be answered within the context of the community in which they are applied, but they are universal. From them operational behaviors may be determined which permit solid evaluation. Although WoUansky calls goal-setting "the first step" (3976, p. 82) , goals for an institution are logically set after a philosophy is established. They are essential to a meaningful evaluative process. Wollansky also suggests a committee approach, by department if necessary, to review the process, any forms used, faculty roles, and individual responsibilities. Ultimately, students, peers, administrators, and self should all be involved in the evaluation process. If students are the best judge of faculty teaching, their judgments should weigh heaviest there. Peers and administrators are better judges for faculty's roles

PAGE 102

93 of research and service. Self-evaluation is the best motivator to self -improvement. Administrators are in the best position to tie all of this information together, spot deficiencies, and recommend avenues for improvement, growth and development. To sum up, the responsibility for sound evaluation lies with university administrators. Committees of administrators, faculty and students are best suited to design the process and actually conduct much of the evaluation, making recommendations for administrators to act on. There is an obvious parallel here with the small company concept described earlier, suggesting a complementarity of function, perhaps performed by the same committees. In any case one may conclude with Wollansky: The results of effective faculty evaluation must materialize in improvement of the teaching and learning process and contribute to professional growth and rewards. . . . The benefactors of sound faculty evaluation must be the student, the faculty member, the institution, and perhaps, in this particular sequence. (1976, p. 26) Siimmary This chapter has offered an historical overview of ocupational programs in the U.S., examined several existing programs in institutions of higher education, compared industrial programming with programming in higher education and considered the problems and opportunities involved with

PAGE 103

94 implementing a program on campus. In addition, the chapter has posited a theory for occupational programs in higher education and offered some considerations on faculty evaluation as it relates to occupational programs. As both an innovation in mental health care and a managerial tool for solving job performance problems, occupational programs are a relatively new phenomenon. Beginning with early attempts to help alcoholics in the workplace, occupational programming has developed simple procedures to resolve complicated management and employee problems of all types centering around job performance. The success rates of these programs measured in terms of a return to a productive life on the job and in the community are unmatched in the personnel or mental health care fields. Institutions of higher education have begun establishing programs only in the last few years but interest has grown rapidly. Because a university is so highly "labor intensive" and the quality of its program is so dependent on its employees, universities may well have a special interest in occupational programs. Of the six university programs reviewed here, the occupational program concept has proved itself flexible in adapting to the varying needs of diverse institutions. But in every case they share the common goal of helping the troubled employee through selfreferral or the basic managerial procedures of observation, documentation, confrontation, referral and follow-up.

PAGE 104

95 In comparing occupational programs in higher education with those in industry, the researcher has noted that programs in higher education share most of the problems of those in industry and some additional ones. The former include the supervisor's traditional reluctance to refer, an oftentimes fragmented organizational structure, and the difficulty in identifying reliable community resources. The latter center around the difficulty of measuring faculty job performance, the vagueness of university goals and supervisory roles, and the peer relationships that usually exist between faculty and their supervisors. Higher education offers special opportunities for occupational programming, however, in that its personnel are generally highly motivated individuals and often concerned with the welfare of their associates. In such a setting, the potential for pro-active, early intervention and preventive developmental programming is great. Several points are made regarding the implementation of an occupational program in a higher education setting. One is that implementation should follow carefully from the program's goals and rationale. Other important considerations are the commitment and active involvement of the top executive and careful placement of the program within the university hierarchy, ensuring top level support and ready access to all university employees. Advisory committees composed of all groups to be served by the program have

PAGE 105

96 proven highly valuable. Geographical location is also important for employee access and confidentiality, and the name of the program should be considered carefully for attractiveness and credibility. Working relationships with reliable community resources are essential. Likewise, these resources must have a balance between expertise in alcoholism and the ability to work with the broadest range of employee problems. Emphasis on faculty from the start is recommended, and the support and active involvement of the unions affected is imperative. As people-oriented, helping enterprises, occupational programs fit very nicely into the university conceptualized as a human development organization. This sort of organization challenges bureaucratic notions about work by making the ends the means, the process itself the goal of the organization. An occupational program advances this goal in the university through a two-track system that takes into account crucial differences between professional and non-professional employees. Program structure designed by faculty and outside experts has the greatest chance of success. A promising framework is the "small company concept" involving both deans and department chairmen and a network of change agents responsible for helping supervisors directly. The small company concept emphasizes and actualizes the human values and community structure of the university.

PAGE 106

97 Research indicates that attempts at faculty evaluation in the university seldom achieve their stated goals, a point of particular concern to a performance-based occupational program. Faculty committees charged with responsibility for such programs may be able to inject new life into evaluation efforts, and indeed give due emphasis to the purposes behind evaluation in a university. Instead of toadying to bureaucrats' rhetoric about "business-like accountability," the systems approach demanded by an occupational program offers a realistic and enlightened course to evaluation. Administrators responsible for evaluation may work effectively toward this goal through committees of students and faculty complementary to those of an employee assistance program using the small company concept.

PAGE 107

CHAPTER III PROCEDURES This study builds a theoretical and data base for a faculty /employee assistance program which may be used by the Florida State University System (SUS) for implementation on each of the nine state university campuses. The data generated by the study indicate the need for a faculty/employee assistance program in the State University system and offer a general outline of the structure for such a program. The structure should be broad enough for use throughout the system but flexible enough to adapt to local conditions. Although the study gathers data unique to the Florida system, the approach it outlines should indicate the shape of system-wide faculty/employee assistance programs possible in other states. The Research Design The design of the study is one of descriptive research. A survey was conducted by mailing a questionnaire to a sample of administrators, department chairmen, and faculty. The questionnaire has a methodological advantage in economy, speediness of dissemination and return, ease of tabulation. 98

PAGE 108

99 and anonymity for the respondent. Majority opinions indicate need for a program and suggest directions for program structure . The descriptive research design is intended to fit Goldman's description of "research in the real situation" (1977, p. 366), that is, practice-oriented research designed to be of fairly immediate application to the practitioner. This study offers practitioners a clear picture of the existing situation pertaining to personal and work performance problems in the State University System and provides a base on which to make future plans and decisions regarding a faculty/employee assistance program. Selection Process The population of this study consists of faculty members, mid-level administrators such as department chairmen, and upper level administrators of the Florida State University System. Representatives of these groups were chosen from three universities in the state system, namely, the University of South Florida, the University of Florida, and the University of North Florida. The number and location of universities are arbitrary, but these three campuses offer examples of the different types of institutions within the state system, i.e., residential and commuter, urban and rural, four-year and two-year upper division. They also

PAGE 109

100 represent two broad geographic areas, north and south central Florida. The sample was selected by randomly choosing from the catalogues of each university the names of 100 faculty engaged primarily in teaching, research, and service; 15 middle group administrators such as department chairmen; and 15 administrators at the dean's level or above. Only ten top administrators were selected from the University of North Florida, since that institution has less than 15 individuals in this category. Included in the top administrators' group were the presidents and academic and health affairs vice-presidents of the institutions sampled in the study. The local presidents of the United Faculty of Florida were also included in the overall sample so that there was opportunity for union participation in the study. The total sample selected numbered 385. The actual sampling was conducted by taking the latest catalogues of the three universities, dividing the total number of faculty and staff listed by 100, and using the quotient to count off those selected from the alphabetized list. For example, the University of South Florida lists 1239 faculty and staff. If that number is divided by 100, the quotient is 12. Therefore every twelfth name was selected to participate in the study. If one of these names did not include the president of the union local, then one

PAGE 110

101 name was arbitrarily chosen to be replaced by that of the union president. A similar method was used to select the 15 mid-level administrators. The number of pages in staff and faculty listing of the catalogue was divided by 15 in each case, and the pages were then counted off by the quotient. The name of the first mid-level administrator on that page was selected to participate in the study. The selection of administrators at the dean's level or above was made in an identical fashion, except that the university presidents and academic and health affairs vicepresidents were included first. The remaining number of administrators to be selected were 12 for the Universities of Florida and South Florida and 18 for the University of North Florida, which does not have a vice president for health affairs. This selection procedure assured that those most affected by the implementation of a faculty /employee assistance program and those with the decision-making power to implement it could comment directly on the need for the program and the desirability of various possible program elements. The sample was assumed to be reasonably representative of the population of the State University System, so that inferences might be made about that population on the basis of the sample.

PAGE 111

102 Instrumentation and Validation Designed by the researcher, the instrument used in this study is a questionnaire of 25 items. The questions are forced-choice, "yes" or "no" items designed to begin with the broadest areas of need and move to more detailed areas. Thus, the first two questions are to determine whether emotional/behavioral problems significant enough to interfere with work performance actually exist among faculty and staff in the State University System. Given the existence of a problem as determined by affirmative answers to questions one and two, questions three, four, and five are to determine whether a faculty/employee assistance program is a desirable approach to it. The next 17 items are to indicate the desirability of various program elements or approaches. These 17 questions cover 10 general areas identified in the literature and discussed at the 1977 and 1978 Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education conferences held in St. Louis and Kansas City. The ten general areas are: 1) whether a university employee assistance program should differentiate between non-professional staff and faculty, administrators, and other professionals; 2) whether the program should be designed by an advisory committee of all affected parties; 3) whether this committee, if there is one, should be differentiated as in item (1) , above; 4) whether the

PAGE 112

103 committee should use outside experts or consultants; 5) whether the committee should choose the name for the program; 6) whether the Board of Regents, the president's office, or the two combined is the best source for implementation within the State System; 7) whether the president's office, the office for academic affairs, or the office for health affairs is the best place for the program within the university bureaucracy; 8) whether a decentralized, "change-agent" approach is desirable; 9) whether supervisory, peer, or self -referrals are likely to be the source of most referrals in a performance-based faculty /employee assistance program; and 10) whether the university's group insurance plan should be increased to cover out-patient counseling and related care for emotional/behavioral problems . The final questionnaire items indicate whether the respondent has tenure, is a member of the union, and is a faculty member, department chairman, at dean's level or above, or other. Additional comments are invited if the respondent so wishes. The validity of the questionnaire was established by asking a panel of experts to examine each item for its relevance to the topic, its fairness, and its clarity. This panel included seven faculty members at the University of Florida: two graduate research professors of Counselor Education, the Dean of Students, and the Chairman of the

PAGE 113

104 Department of Education Administration who is also Director of the Institute for Higher Education. Two other graduate professors whose specialty is research, one each from the Department of Counselor Education and the Department of Education Administration, likewise examined the questionnaire. In addition, an informal pilot study was conducted utilizing eight other faculty and four administrators. Their comments and suggestions were utilized in revising the questionnaire. The final form of the questionnaire was thus the result of the work of the researcher, the panel of experts, and the pilot study. According to Isaac and Michael (1971) , applying the usual measures of reliability to the questionnaire is inappropriate in this instance, since the study is more nearly a survey that seeks both information and the attitudes of respondents in a given area. This initial study, in the nature of a consiimer survey or attitudinal study, might precede a more extensive, detailed study where the usual measures of reliability are more likely to apply. At the same time, it is recognized that the attitudes and information sought may not be consistent over a period of time since they are susceptible to influence by situational factors, e.g., the actions of a particular legislature toward higher education in a given year. Periodic assessments might reveal these changes in opinion, but do not in themselves reflect on the reliability of a particular instrument because

PAGE 114

105 the changes reflected in the surveys are the result of situational factors, not the instrument being used. Data Collection The questionnaire was mailed to the faculty, administrators, and union representatives selected for participation in the study. It was accompanied by an introductory letter explaining the purpose of the study and expressing appreciation for their participation, giving a firm date for response two weeks from the date of the letter, and stressing the importance of a prompt response. Participants were assured that the information collected would be completely confidential. A stamped envelope addressed to the researcher was enclosed. In addition, the questionnaire itself was prefaced with a brief explanation of employee assistance programs. On the deadline date for return of the questionnaires, a second mailing was sent thanking participants for returning their questionnaires and requesting those who had not returned them to do so immediately. One week from the mailing of the thank-you/reminder card, data collection ceased and the analysis began. Of the 385 selected for the sample, 181 responded to the survey, giving a 47% overall response, well above the expected 4 0%. Had the overall response equalled less than

PAGE 115

106 30%, however, a small sample of respondents on each campus would have been selected and telephoned for a personal interview. Data Analysis Questionnaires returned to the researcher were encoded on computer cards for use with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences computer program. Questions 11 through 13 and 19 through 21 were coded through the IF program option so that a "Yes" answer to a prior question in the set of three would require "No" answers in the remaining two, thereby making the three questions a single forced-choice item. For example, a "Yes" to "supervisors" in Question 19, asking whether most referrals are likely to come from supervisors, meant that Questions 20 and 21 were automatically coded "No" by the computer, since logically most referrals can come only from a single identified source. Question 17, a f ill-in-the-blank on the questionnaire, was punched "Yes" if the blank was filled in, indicating a specific choice for "other," and "No" if left blank, a reasonable interpretation of a missing response on this item as being equivalent to a "No." In addition to the IF transformations, the program was defined to generate all frequencies and crosstabulations between Questions 1 through 11 and Questions 23 through 25.

PAGE 116

107 Crosstabulations were also sought between Questions 1 and 2 and Questions 3, 4, and 5, and between Question 5 and Questions 6 and 7. In this way, the program was defined to report frequency of response to each item, frequency of response by demographic variable, frequency of response to policy issues in terms of respondents' experience, and frequency of response to procedures for implementation of policy. Data were then compared not only among groups but also to recommendations made in the literature. Limitations of the Study The main limitation of this study is that, although the study indicates the need for a faculty/employee assistance program, it cannot assure in any way that a program will be implemented, no matter how great the need. Likewise, even though the desirability of some program elements and even a comprehensive approach may be determined, the study does not provide a detailed plan for any given campus. By the same token, the study cannot assure that a program, once implemented, will not be implemented only in some partial fashion, to become what is known as a "paper program." In short, the numerous political factors associated with any significant activity or program within a large organization like the State University System will determine the ultimate utility of the study for that System.

PAGE 117

108 Another limitation is the generalizability of the study to other state systems. No two state systems of higher education are exactly alike; and where other systems may be similar to Florida's, political atmosphere and priorities may once again be greatly different. This situation may be true also for private institutions of higher education. Other state or private systems indicating similar needs may call for significantly different program elements or approaches; still others may easily adopt those outlined in the study. A program in the Florida State University System, then, cannot serve as an automatic blueprint for other states or other systems.

PAGE 118

CHAPTER IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY This study was designed to build a theoretical base for Employee Assistance Programs in higher education from the literature, and to describe the need and general outline for such a program for faculty in the Florida State University System from a questionnaire survey. The population studied consisted of faculty and administrators on three campuses in the State University System. The demographic variables considered relevant to the study were tenure, union membership, and position. This chapter reports the findings of the questionnaire survey. Analysis of the Findings The 47% overall rate of return for the questionnaire exceeded the expected 40% as a good response. Many individuaresponses could be described as spirited, since there were many notations and comments on the questionnaires. Some respondents saw fit to answer selectively, skipping those items which they may have felt were irrelevant or too difficult to answer. Nevertheless, most items were answered, and this was especially true of Questions 1 and 2. Ninety-eight percent of the sample responded to 109

PAGE 119

110 Table 1. Frequency of Total Responses to the Questionnaire Question % % % Yes No Total^ 1. Known others needing help 85 13 98 2. Known others with personal/ performance problems 82 16 98 3. University has adequate policies/ procedures 12 74 86 4. University should offer help 80 16 96 5. University should have policy statement 67 25 92 6. Differentiate procedures 22 69 91 7. Design by committee 52 37 89 8. Differentiate committee 48 36 84 9. Use outside consultants 75 15 90 10. Committee should choose name 55 19 74 11. Implement by President and BOR 45 45 90 12. Implement by BOR only A 'z C Q 13. Implement by President only 32 58 90 14. Locate in President's Office 47 26 73 15. Locate in Academic Affairs 21 40 61 16. Locate in Health Affairs 35 33 68 17. Locate other 6 1 7 18. Favor decentralized approach 32 60 92 19. Most referrals from supervisors 43 49 92

PAGE 120

Ill Table 1 — Continued. Question % % % Yes No Total^ 20. Most referrals from peers 43 77 91 21. Most referrals self-referrals 33 59 92 22. Favor insurance coverage 71 23 94 23. Tenure 60 37 97 24. Union member 26 70 96 Note: Maximum possible number of cases = 181. Total of less than 100% reflects failure of some subjects to respond to a given question.

PAGE 121

112 these items, and well over 80% of the respondents attested that they had known co-workers who needed help with personal problems and whose personal problems sometimes interfered with their work. Another 80% asserted that the university should offer help to troubled employees, and 74% indicated that the university lacked adequate policies and procedures to do so. Interestingly, fewer respondents, 67%, were willing to commit the university to writing such a policy. A majority of respondents, 69%, did not think that the procedures for a troubled employee policy should differentiate between faculty/administrators and other employees; most thought the program should be tailored to the university by a committee of the affected parties and that the committee should be divided between f acuity/administrators and other employees. Most also thought the committee should have the help of outside experts and that the committee should choose the name for the program. It is less clear who respondents thought should implement the program, the combination of president and Board of Regents receiving a 50-50 split choice and either office taken individually receiving an unequivocal negative. Most respondents would locate the program administratively in the President's Office. The Office for Health Affairs was a distant second choice and Academic Affairs was apparently thought to be unsuitable. Sixty percent of the respondents

PAGE 122

113 indicated they would not favor a decentralized approach on the departmental level. Although no category of referral received a positive majority, most respondents seemed to think referrals more likely to come from supervisors, least likely to come from peers. A clear majority, 71%, favored major medical coverage for counseling and related care for employees with emotional/behavioral problems . Sixty percent of the respondents had received tenure, and only 26% were union members. Most of the respondents, 66%, were teaching or research faculty; only 6% were department chairmen. Thirteen percent were administrators at the dean's level or above, and 12% were other, including the positions of assistant dean, administrator, director, advisor, librarian and staff assistant. Responses by Tenure Responses from tenured and non-tenured personnel showed little difference from the total responses or from each other. Tenured respondents were noticeably more negative concerning the adequacy of university policy (Question 3) than non-tenured or general respondents, more positive on the desirability of a written policy, and more emphatically negative about implementation by the Board of Regents. Contrary to all others, tenured respondents favored location of the program administratively in the Office for Health Affairs. Non-tenured respondents indicated

PAGE 123

114 Table 2. Identification of Sample by Position. Position % Teaching or research faculty 66 Department chairmen 6 Dean's level or above 13 Other 12 Total^ 97 Total of less than 100% reflects failure of some subjects to respond to a given question.

PAGE 124

115 t3 O U 3 C <0 d o 2 (1) C 0) <#p O 2 (0 (1) dP O 2 to c*p a; CI c o •H •P CO (1) 3 O CO 00 00 rH x: C •H -a 0) 0) c (0 u <\) Xi +> o c o c CO CO c o to (U CO -p ja •H o > u Cu to U (1) 0) o -p o c e u o Q) O C CM O (N as o o V£> O o 00 in CM 00 in o o CO 1^ CO o o CO in 1^ in CO CO 0) •H u •H tH o Cu Q) -P tC 3 cr (0 CO x: >i to CO U 73 a) 0) > •H c D U o u to -p c (0 -p 3 to c o o 0) •H to +J 3 o o CN o 00 e c (U to o o x: o -a iH 3 O XI to 0) 0) -p -p •H CN in CO 0) e to O D U in in in CN in 00 CO en o o rH in in in m VO rH rH rH rH rH rH H Pi o m c (0 c i X! •p c 0) g rH Cu E H

PAGE 125

116 Q) U C 0) I c o 2 T3 U C i 0 u H 10 rH •rl to nj > V4 c m o CQ ^^ o 14H •H CQ u 0) U 0) (U o (d u a, a, 0) >4H en -p MH •H 0) 0 •H c u < (U 0 0 rH 0 CQ Q) •H N 0) u « 0) TJ e •H UH »H to o u •H (1) +J rH 0) CQ rH CO CO CQ u (U eo rH rH rH d >1 >1 Sh o M to to to to XI cu < m C U iH s: 0) M M u -p -p c c c: o 0) 0) 0) CO c c •H •H •H O CQ CQ CQ > E e 0 0 0 0 to 0 0 0 to H H S, s s fa fN n in vo 00 cri o rH CN rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH CN CN CN

PAGE 126

117 c o •H D C O 2 C O •H c z (0 o 2 CO o -H +J CO (U D o 00 00 m 00 in in 00 in 00 in CO 00 CM \ n (U in 00 00 00 in CM in lO in in CN 00 00 r>4 CO u •H U \ l-l H ^^ e o (U rH tc (0 XJ 0 c iH c CO (U 0 0) >-< (U (U CO (U X! CO +J 0) M dj -P CD CP IM > 3 -p C 0 (U CO 3 IW -p (0 0 c a e 0 x: Q) 0) H +J x: •H 0) 0) U 0) u rH •a -o 0 +J 3 0) -P J3 nj iH -p c CO T) (U •H 0 3 • H 0 c iH c CO 0 0 0 3 x: i3 Q) dJ U O CO (0 x; CO CO -P 5 -p x: M 0) fO nj 0) CD 0) QJ U >< CO >i >1 •H •H -o Si x: c 4-) Q) •P >i +J H (U p -P (0 •H k •H •H C C c CO (U 0 o e CD 3 m CO 0) 0) -p -p u 'a V4 u e ^ 3 +J C 0 (U 0) 0) 0) CP 0) 0 •H > 4-1 > o > > -P IW •1 H «4-l 0 0 u -H O -H nj M-l CO IH 1 XI -p G 0) e 0) rH 04 B H

PAGE 127

118 o •H c dP O 2 (0 OP 4 C O •H -P CO QJ O in vo n o CO vo in vo ro in n (N vo 00 '3* vo CM ro 00 vo o in CO rsj in in 00 O o in o in o vo o in in 00 vo o O rH rH r>4 00 vo VO n o fS rH VO VO vo vo r-i iH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH CO U 0 CO 0) CO H >1 u o -H •0 •H CO (0 > u c U 0 U u 0 •H CO CU CU CU O CO MH CP m -rl CU to >1 c m m n3 10 CO u rH < UH 1 CU c -p UH E IW > 0 •H c o < i >i O (U 4J rO CO fO X) cm < CU c M u CU IH u 3 -P -p c C 4J u CU CU CO C c •H •H •rl 0 CU m MH c 0) 0) T3 CU CU •H B e 0) (D O 0) M 0) (U 4J -P -P 4J )H n (0 (0 to CO 0 -p •P 0 CJ O V O > CO CO > e E o O 0 o (0 0 0 to H H nil fa s s fa (N n in vo CO o rH H >-{ rH rH rH rH rH (N CN

PAGE 128

119 just the reverse on this item (Question 16) , giving a clearly favorable response to the Office of the President. They also favored implementation by the president and the Board of Regents. Responses by Union Membership Similarly, union members and non-union members showed few differences between each other or with the total response. Union members were appreciably more enthusiastic about the university's obligation to help its employees and about the desirability of increased insurance coverage than either non-members or the general sample. They were also more enthusiastic about a written policy statement for emotional/behavioral problems, more favorable to a committee approach, and more disposed to making use of outside experts. Union members were as favorable to program implementation by the president and the Board of Regents combined as non-members, and both groups were equally opposed to implementation by the Board of Regents alone and equally favorable to locating the program in the president's office administratively. Non-union members were strongly opposed to locating the program in academic affairs, as contrasted with union members, and were slightly more favorable to locating the program in health affairs. As opposed to union members and the general sample, non-union members saw referrals from supervisors more likely, while union members saw self -referrals as more likely.

PAGE 129

120 Responses by Position Somewhat more differences showed up among respondents by position. Dean's level or above and Other were strongly positive on Questions 1 and 2, as were Chairmen on Question 2. Dean's level or above were the strongest of any group in denying that the university had adequate policies or procedures for personal/performance problems (95%) ; Chairmen and Other somewhat less than all other groups. Dean's level or above and Other were also more positive that the university should offer help, nearly as much so as union members. Only the Chairmen, however, and, to a lesser extent, Faculty were strongly disposed toward a written policy statement, while Dean's level or above and Other were favorable but less so. All groups were opposed to differentiating a program policy, but Faculty and Chairmen opted to divide a committee of the affected parties between professional and nonprofessional groups of employees. Chairmen were the most favorable to the committee approach. All groups strongly favored the use of outside consultants. A majority of Chairmen and Dean's level or above chose implementation of policy by the president and the Board of Regents. Faculty and Other also preferred this option over implementation by either the president only or the Board of Regents only, especially by the Board of Regents alone. Again, all groups favored locating the program in the

PAGE 130

121 president's office and opposed the other two possibilities suggested, except that Faculty were slightly favorable to the health affairs office. A majority of Chairmen also favored a decentralized approach, but this approach was opposed by the other groups. Chairmen were highly disposed to think that most referrals would come from supervisors; Dean's level or above and Other, slightly less so. Faculty seemed to think referrals more likely to come from supervisors than from any other source. All groups favored additional major medical coverage for emotional/behavioral problems. As to the relationship between respondents ' experience with troubled employees and the perceived adequacy of university policies and procedures, approximately 90% of those having had such experience found university policy inadequate. Similarly, almost 90% with such experience thought the university had an obligation to help these employees. A lesser niimber, 74%, thought a written policy statement was necessary in order to do so. Of those who thought a policy statement necessary, only 22% concluded it was necessary to establish separate procedures for faculty /administrators and other employees. Sixty-eight percent of this group favored a committee approach to program design.

PAGE 131

122 u 0) x: +> o 0) > o Si < u o (0 G (0 Q) a c u •H x; u 4-) U 0 2 CO dp O 2 dP <1) dP O 2 (0 OP QJ dP o 2 CO dp (U c o •H -P CO 0) O LD in iH 0 00 in CN rH rin iH n in vo IT) in 0 (N in 00 CO CN cr> in CN in in CO vo CO in in o^ 0 in vo CO in in H n ro i 0 0 (U CQ \ rH •H rH (1) iH CO 13 CLi ID Si 0 C C iH CO (0 (U o (U 5-1 Q) 0 CO CU CO 4J CU 5-1 (U 4-> CO 4-1 >-i (0 U-l > 3 4-) G 0 C CP O CO 4-1 13 4-1 (0 0 (U tJ" CD 0 0) (U •H 4-1 si 13 'H ^ CO CU 0 0 0 3 a< CO O Si x: CU i 0) 0 0 CO CO x: o CO CO -P 4J X! >i 5-1 U Q) 5-1 n) CO CU CO S3 0) 1 •H H •0 J= j:: c -p \ -p +j -P -P 4J •H CU 4-» 4J •n Ui H C (h CO (U c 0 O 6 CO 0} CO CO 0) CU CU 4J p CU 54 U -H ^ 6 54 c 54 3 4J £ c OJ O 0 cu CU CU CP (U 0 •H IS M-l > -H > > -p •H U4 rH 0 0 M •H M •H •H Ifl M-l CO U4 (U c C 0) C 0 c C -P H CU -H CO 0 E D D CO Q Q Q D u H CN n in 00 • 0 • rH iH

PAGE 132

123 •a 0) 3 C •H 4-1 C o u I I in 0) H E^ 0) X! 4J O > O Si < u o CO c n3 OJ Q C E •H U 4J 6P o 2 tn o 2 CO o 2 tn C O H -P (0 0) a 00 Lf) in 00 04 rH n CO 00 ro 00 in in ro ro ro (0 o o ro ro in ro '3' o o 00 CM m in 00 in ro ro in in 00 ro CM 0^ r^ 0 0 0 00 u 1 ro 0 rH rH ( — ^ _1 r~l / — ^ ^ J V^ 0 0 0 1 ^ u 1 in ro I N i~H o\ o\ vo 00 V£ vo in 00 in fN m 00 rH rH rH r>j ro in ro in ro rH "a* en (U 0 09 X5 to rH >i 0 0 iH -H to > u C iw M 0 M to u 0 MH •H to Q) Sh 0) 0 •H C U < 0) 0 0 rH 0 en (0 0) -H N u 0) U (1) E H m m CO 0 •H Q) +j rH 0} to TJ rH ITJ to CO CO >i 0) rs (C rH rH rH c >1 u 0 0; M +J (tJ (0 to (0 X! Xi & < a: 0) c U ^ >H x; Q) u M u 3 +) p c C c •p U 0} 0) 0) CO C c •H H •H 0 d) MH MH c 0) H 0) 0) +) -P P p ^ rH rH (0 (0 fO ttj 0 -p p p 0 U 0 0 0 > CO CO to > e E 0 0 0 0 (0 0 0 0 H H s s S In rg ro in VD 00 0 rH 0 -0 XI (C 0 0) X! D (0 Jh 0 0 rH CO C c to 0) 0 E -0 H H in (0 x; u c (0 a^ • >1 rH '-^ p rH to H 3 < 0) 0 >1+J (0 -p 0 MH r-l C 3 in U 0) to Q) fa CO CO 0) II CO iH CM C (U CH 0 C D4 c 0) • CO 0 Cn 0 0 rH < ip c UH •rl •P 0 Q. E Q) 4J (0 -p 0 3 0 X 0 2 0) 03

PAGE 133

124 o x; in •H U -P H C H 0) >. o e Qi (1) m Q) ni H > +J 0) (0 tn > x: •H c: rH 3 O x3 a W rH >.x: +J -H U tn Q) > o •H c tn to (U m -H x: o to •H >irH +j o •H to (1) > •H C D (U M 3 i rH rH to cu e rH fO E n CO M !h n o Q) m CO x: x: 0) iH 0 0 a XI 03 c C rH •H )H 0 o c 10 c C 0 > CO

PAGE 134

125 Table 7. Sample Response to Procedures for Implementation of Policy Differentiate Design by Procedures Committee % % % % Variable Yes No Yes No Sample favoring a written policy statement 22 78 68 32

PAGE 135

126 Findings Related to the Research Questions Of the six research questions this study was designed to answer, two (Questions 1 and 6) were examined in Chapter II; Questions 2-5 were addressed by means of the questionnaire survey. 1) What are the elements in the literature to support a theory of employee assistance programs in higher education? The literature unanimously agrees that employee assistance programs are both workable and desirable in higher education, albeit with modifications to the traditional, industrial model. Further, if universities are defined as human development organizations, an employee assistance program is demanded by the very nature of the university. 2) Have faculty and administrators in the State University System encountered personal problems among their peers that could affect work performance? Every category of respondents clearly answered in the affirmative, including 85% of the respondents overall, indicating that they had known co-workers needing help. Even more, 82% overall attested that they had known co-workers with personal problems serious enough to affect their work performance. University decision-makers turned in the highest percentage of response: 96% of those categorized as Dean's level or above indicated that they had known university employees needing help.

PAGE 136

127 3) Do faculty and administrators in the State University System perceive a faculty/employee assistance program as necessary and/or desirable on their campuses? The answer to this question may be inferred from Questions 3, 4, and 5. A large majority in all categories of respondents answered that university policy and procedures for seriously troubled faculty and employees are inadequate, that the university should offer help to troubled faculty and employees, and that the university should have a written policy statement (1) limiting disciplinary action strictly to work performance problems and (2) treating serious personal problems like any other health liability. Again, university decision-makers reported the highest response: 95% thought the university did not have adequate policies or procedures to help employees with personal/ performance problems, and 91% of both Dean's level or above and Other thought the university should offer help. Clearly, a majority of faculty and administrators see a faculty /employee assistance program as necessary or desirable . 4) What are some essential components of an employee assistance program model for the Florida State University System? A majority of every group, except Dean's level or above and Other, agreed that the program should be designed

PAGE 137

128 by a committee of the affected parties, and that procedures should not be differentiated between faculty/administrators and other employees. The committee, however, should be divided between faculty/administrators and other employees, and it should have the help of outside experts and should choose the name for the program. It was also unanimously agreed that major medical coverage should be extended to cover counseling and related care for employees with emotional/behavioral problems, with coverage for dependents available at a nominal charge . 5) What is the best approach to implementation of an employee assistance program in the State University System on both a local and a system-wide level? A combination of the Board of Regents and the university presidents, in conjunction with the affected unions, seemed to hold the greater favor as the source for implementing a faculty/employee assistance program in the State University System. The majority of respondents felt the program should be located administratively in the president's office, except tenured respondents, who preferred the office for health affairs. A decentralized approach at the departmental level did not seem desirable to most respondents. However, it was thought that most referrals would come from supervisors.

PAGE 138

129 6) From the literature, what is a realistic approach to the performance evaluation component of an employee assistance program where faculty are concerned? The literature is agreed that performance evaluation is necessary to higher education, although most institutions presently do a rather poor job in conducting performance evaluations. Thoresen and others acknowledge the problems connected with a performance evaluation component of a faculty/employee assistance program but maintain that it is nevertheless desirable, augmented perhaps by a peer referral system. Roman asserts that neither a performance evaluation component nor a peer referral system is workable in a f acuity/employee assistance program, and suggests instead a decentralized approach combined with a preventive, developmental emphasis.

PAGE 139

CHAPTER V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS Siimmary According to the studies of epidemiologists and other researchers of the workplace, university faculty may be at high risk to alcoholism and other emotional/behavioral problems. Additionally, the treatment accorded employees by the university has a special impact on its constituencies, the students and the public. For these reasons, a university Employee Assistance Program could be of signal benefit to the university and its employees, though no such program now exists in the Florida State University System . An examination of the literature confirmed the benefits of Employee Assistance Programs for a number of institutions of higher education, provided a description of some of their special characteristics, and suggested that a theory for such programs in higher education lies in conceiving of universities as human development organizations. A questionnaire mailed out to a random sample of faculty and administrators on three campuses of the State University System sought information on the need for such a program, some essential components, and the best approach to its implementation. 130

PAGE 140

131 Response to the questionnaire was very good at 47% of the sample. Respondents almost unanimously affirmed the need for a faculty/employee assistance program and the obligation of the university to implement one. They also favored program design by committee, use of outside consultants, implementation through the Board of Regents and the president's office combined, location in the president's office administratively, and major medical coverage for emotional/behavioral problems. Opinions were mixed on differentiating procedures between f acuity/administrators and other employees. A substantial number thought referrals were more likely to come from supervisors and least likely to come from peers. A majority did not favor a decentralized approach with the first point of contact being in the individual's own department. Sixty percent of the respondents were tenured; 26%, union members. Most (66%) were teaching or research faculty, the remainder being chairmen or administrators. Chairmen represented the smallest group (6%) . Responses to all questions by the various categories of respondents tended to be more similar than different. Discussion Faculty/employee assistance programs represent a concept in which most faculty and administrators have a direct

PAGE 141

132 and vital interest. This statement is supported by the high rate of return of the questionnaire and by the detailed fashion in which it was completed by many respondents who added comments and notations throughout. Some were openly hostile, with comments like "Screw the unions 1" and "The university has no business fooling with this nonsense." There were many who offered constructive — and some less than constructive — comments about the questionnaire itself. Still others were warmly positive, with comments like "This is a fine program and badly needed" and "Clearly, this kind of assistance program is desirable." There were also several requests for the results of the study. Reactions to the Questionnaire Although the majority of the respondents apparently had no problems with the questionnaire, some did. The difficulties were indicated by both the nature of the comments and the lack of response to some items. The chief difficulty seemes to be that the questionnaire asked for opinions on some topics about which respondents were apparently uninformed. Some claimed they were altogether unfamiliar with university policies, at least in the area of work performance and severe personal problems. Others indicated they had no idea whether or not a committee would be useful or who should implement the program. It

PAGE 142

133 is hard to resist labelling a small number of responses as reflecting an isolationist syndrome. In fairness, however, the introduction to the questionnaire noted that employee assistance program concepts were relatively new and could be unfamiliar to the respondent. Still another difficulty affecting a small number of respondents was the style and layout of the questionnaire. Some items ask a response on different components of a faculty/employee assistance program, even though the respondent may have indicated that there is no need for such a program, and most items are in a forced choice, yes or no format. Some of the problems here might have been mitigated had respondents been encouraged not to continue with the questionnaire once they had answered negatively to Questions 1 through 5. In a few cases, the intensity of the vexation is difficult to explain. Occasionally, respondents' ire appeared in reality to be directed at the faculty union or the Board of Regents. For a few respondents, the employee assistance program concept may have appeared to be one more covert manipulation labelled as "help" in an increasingly manipulative and bureaucratic society. In such cases, including the inappropriately hostile ones, it was evident that discussing personal and work performance problems represents a topic about which individuals have a high degree of feeling, often negative.

PAGE 143

134 Level of Agreement Among the Respondents Although differences among the categories of respondents have been noted and discussed, the basic agreement of respondents on most items should be emphasized. On most questions, most respondents were in agreement by a large majority, both in overall response and as discrete groups. Three items had a split response. These items were Questions 11, who should implement the program; 16, whether it should be located in health affairs; and 19, whether supervisors are the most likely source of referral. Differences on these items could indicate a simple division of opinion among respondents. It is also possible, given the relatively lower rate of response on these items, that respondents were unclear or undecided about the point in question. The principal thrust of the responses, however, is conclusive. A substantial number of faculty and administrators are aware from their own direct experience that a need exists and that the university has an obligation to address itself to that need. Further, there is a general consensus on the basic approach and structure of a faculty/ employee assistance program. A Comparison of Findings with the Literature Responses to most questions by the subjects in this study confirmed what appears in the literature on employees

PAGE 144

135 assistance programs in higher education. A need certainly exists, a written policy is necessary for the protection of employees, and a committee approach with the help of outside experts is desirable. In addition, the study indicates that a majority of respondents are likely to agree that a faculty /employee assistance program is in the university's own best interest, since they deem present policies inadequate; and they would add that it has an obligation to implement a program, that is, the university should offer help. This inference is consistent with the discussion in Chapter II of the university as a human development organization with unique obligations to its various constituencies, including its own employees. The results of the study appear to contradict the literature on a few important points. The review of the literature noted that differentiation of procedure (not policy) between faculty /administrators and other employees is essential, that location in the Office of Health Affairs is most desirable, that a decentralized approach might prove the most workable, and that most referrals are likely to be self-referrals or peer referrals, but not supervisory referrals. Respondents in this study seemed to think otherwise . With regard to differentiation of procedures, it is worth noting that most respondents opposed differentiation in principle (Question 6) but favored it in practice, i.e., in the

PAGE 145

136 makeup of the committee (Question 8) . This disparity may be explained by the possibility that "differentiation" is connotative of "discrimination," particularly as worded in Question 6. Perhaps a better phrasing would have been "separate procedures for faculty/administrators and other employees." In any case, it seems certain that respondents would not tolerate a "second class" approach for any group of employees . The preference for locating the program administratively in the Office of the President rather than the Office for Health Affairs may be due in part to the fact that one of the three campuses sampled does not have an Office for Health Affairs, thereby limiting the choices of respondents on that campus to the Office of the President or the Office of Academic Affairs. This situation biases the overall results against a choice of health affairs as a location. The rejection of a decentralized approach seems to be a straightforward choice on the part of the respondents. It may be that an approach beyond the departmental level to perhaps the college level would be more acceptable. But respondents distinctly did not want the first point of contact in a faculty assistance program to be in their own department. Finally, the overall negative responses of faculty concerning the source of program referrals may only mean

PAGE 146

137 that much of the literature is simply speculative when emphasis is placed on peer or self-ref erral . Conclusions The results of this study lead to the following conclusions : 1) Respondents to the survey know or have known faculty, administrators and other university personnel who suffer from personal problems, and these problems can and do affect their work performance. 2) Consistent with the idea of the university as a human development organization, the university has an obligation to help its troubled employees, though it may take disciplinary action if work performance is adversely affected. 3) Faculty and administrators in at least three universities within the State University System see a faculty/ employee assistance program as necessary or desirable, with a written policy statement necessary to implementing the program. 4) A faculty/employee assistance program and policy are best implemented jointly by the Board of Regents, the university presidents, and the affected unions. 5) The design of a faculty/employee assistance program by a committee of the affected parties, with the help of outside consultants, is desirable.

PAGE 147

138 6) A faculty /employee assistance program decentralized to the departmental level is not desirable. 7) Adequate insurance coverage for counseling and related care for emotional/behavioral problems for employees and their families is desirable. Implications The following implications may be drawn from this study : 1) Based on data drawn from three universities, there is a demonstrated need for a faculty/employee assistance program in the Florida State University System. The Board of Regents and the university presidents should initiate action to develop such a program now, particularly in view of the results of this study. If this study raises awareness and, consequently, expectations that are not then fulfilled, it could produce cynicism among the respondents. 2) Use of committees of the affected parties appears to be a sound management approach to the implementation of complex programs. The nine university presidents, at the suggestion of the Board of Regents, should create such committees on their campuses, with separate subcommittees for faculty /administrators and for other employees. Committee tasks should be the development of policies and procedures and the design and organization of a functioning program.

PAGE 148

139 3) Faculty/employee assistance program coiranittees seeking outside expertise will create a demand which community resources in Florida will be hard-pressed to meet. By consulting first with the state's professional organization, the Florida Occupational Program Committee, Inc., however, the Board of Regents, the presidents, and the committees could work with the Florida Occupational Program Committee toward meeting the demand and assuring high standards of quality. 4) The development of a faculty /employee assistance program policy by university presidents, the Board of Regents, the faculty union, and faculty generally offers an excellent opportunity for them to work together toward common goals. Rather than placing these groups at loggerheads with each other over university policies and issues, to the detriment of the larger university community, the establishment and support of the committees would also promote a spirit of cooperation and provide an experience of working toward common aims. 5) The implementation of a faculty /employee assistance program could lead to an organizational attitude of genuine concern for all university employees, a concern that is genuine because it is rooted in the actual practices and behavior of the organization.

PAGE 149

140 6) For those individuals who might otherwise be lost to alcoholism, serious family difficulties, or other severe personal problems, the timely offer of help at a critical point in their careers should have an altogether salutory effect for most. In this event, work performance for those individuals reached by the program should improve dramatically, with the university recovering their individual contributions which it might otherwise have lost. Additionally, the morale of closely associated co-workers should improve as well. These benefits should be demonstrable even though the implementation of a faculty /employee assistance program might have no measurable effect on work performance overall. Recommendations for Further Research The completion of this study suggests the following areas for further research: 1) Conduct studies similar to this one in other state systems outside of Florida such as "A Needs Assessment for a Faculty/Employee Assistance Program in Public Institutions of Higher Education in Pennsylvania." Such studies might achieve satisfactory results by using only Questions 1 through 5; a modification of 6; 7 and 9; 11 through 18; and 22 through 25. These contain the basic information necessary to establish need, approach, and demographic data. The remaining items

PAGE 150

141 may be more properly asked of the committee after it has familiarized itself with the need and policy and procedural issues. Identical studies could also be conducted on individual campuses . 2) There are several suggestions in the literature that faculty /employee assistance programs might well go beyond work performance and serious personal problems to developmental and career-oriented programs. A study on the developmental aspects of university employee assistance programs could verify the value of this approach and describe procedures which might be followed. A similar study might address the issues involved and possible structure of supervisory training and faculty orientation to a program. 3) A related issue which merits research, especially today when higher education institutions are examining their future roles, is the current and future status of the university as a human development organization. A comparison of this role and the roles of teacher and socializer of the young, as well as conferrer of social privilege, deserves further discussion. Further research in the area of employee assistance programs in higher education should increase awareness of the need that exists for these programs. Further research should also serve to encourage the university to expand its mission as a human development organization, that is.

PAGE 151

142 an organization that values not only its students but also its employees. A functioning faculty /employee assistance program should go a long way toward helping a university fulfill this mission, not only in performing its functions of teaching, research, and service more effectively, but also in demonstrating that human beings are of the highest value.

PAGE 152

APPENDIX A A NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR A FACULTY/EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM Introduction For the purposes of this study, an Employee Assistance Program is defined as a people-oriented, helping program through which an employee with personal problems may receive help through self-referral, or if work performance is affected, through a policy of referral and follow-up by the supervisor. Such programs may be considered a fringe benefit that employees may avail themselves of, like an institutional medical program, or as a referral service. These programs are designed to cover the whole range of personal problems that can interfere with work performance, including alcoholism, drug abuse, financial, marital and family, and psychological. Employee Assistance Programs have enjoyed very high success rates, with thousands of jobs and even lives saved for employees and with valuable employees saved for the organization. They have been enthusiastically endorsed by unions and management alike. Because the quality of a university's program is so dependent on its employees, universities have a special interest in Employee Assistance Programs. Thirty-four colleges and universities in the nation have implemented Employee Assistance Programs for faculty and staff (and sometimes students) since 1974. An Employee Assistance Program does not abrogate existing personnel policies in any way, and employees may always refuse help. Use of the program, whether by self -referral or supervisory referral, is strictly confidential. The following 25 questions are designed to ascertain the need for a Faculty /Employee Assistance Program in the State University System and the desirability of various program elements or approaches. Although the Employee Assistance 143

PAGE 153

144 Program concept is relatively new and the questions involve program components with which you may be unfamiliar, please answer the questions to the best of your ability. All answers remain confidential. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM FACULTY/EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Have you known others working for this university who could have used professional help to cope with personal or family problems? YES ( ) NO ( ) 2. Have you known others working for this university whose personal or family problems interfered with their work? YES ( ) NO ( ) 3. Does your university have adequate policies or procedures to reach and help faculty or employees who have problems severe enough to interfere with their V'ork? YES( ) N0( ) 4. Do you think the university should offer help for personal problems to faculty and staff? YES ( ) NO ( ) 5. Do you think your university should have a policy statement limiting disciplinary action strictly to work performance problems and treating serious personal problems like any other health liability? YES ( ) NO ( ) 6. Do you think the procedures that follow from such a policy should be differentiated between professionals such as faculty and administrators, and non-professional staff? YES( ) N0( ) 7. Should this policy and procedures that follow from it be designed by a committee of the affected parties? YES ( ) N0( ) 8. Do you think such a committee should be divided between professionals and nonprofessionals as in No. 6? YES ( ) NO ( )

PAGE 154

145 9. Should this committee have the help of outside experts or consultants? YES ( ) NO ( ) 10. Do you think the committee should choose the name for this program? YES ( ) NO ( ) In conjunction with the affected unions, who is the best source for implementation of a Faculty /Employee Assistance Program: 11. the President's office and the Board of Regents? YES ( ) NO ( ) 12 . the Board of Regents only? YES ( ) NO ( ) 13. the President's Office only? YES ( ) N0( ) Which administrative division do you think would give the program a voice at upper administrative levels and would be acceptable to every level of university employee? 14. the President's office YES ( ) NO ( ) 15. the Office for Academic Affairs YES ( ) N0( ) 16. the Office for Health Affairs YES ( ) NO ( ) 17. other YES ( ) NO ( ) 18. Would you favor a decentralized approach to such a program, with an individual in your department as a first point of contact should you choose to use the program? YES( ) N0{ ) In a performance-based Faculty /Employee Assistance Program, where do you think most referrals are likely to come from: 19. supervisors? YES ( ) NO ( ) 20. suggested by peers? YES ( ) NO ( ) 21. self -referral? YES ( ) NO ( )

PAGE 155

146 22. Would you favor major medical coverage under the university's group insurance plan for counseling and related care for employees with emotional/behavioral problems (with dependent coverage available at a nominal charge)? 23. Have you received tenure? 24. Are you a member of the union? 25. Your position (check one): Teaching gr research faculty Department chairman Dean's level or above Other : PLEASE ADD ANY COMMENTS YOU MAY WISH.

PAGE 156

APPENDIX B STATE POLICY ON ALCOHOLISM Adopted by Governor and Cabinet on July 17, 1973 The state of Florida recognizes alcoholism as a treatable illness, a medical and public health problem and an employment problem. When the drinking of an employee affects his work performance, he is a problem drinker. As with any health liability, alcoholism is of serious concern to the employee and employer alike. Therefore, it is the policy of this State to recognize alcoholism as a disease . 1. Alcoholism among State employees shall be dealt with in a forthright manner by the employing agency, and problem drinking shall be recognized as a health problem and treated as such, with no attempt to hide the diagnosis. 2. The problem drinker, once identified, will be counseled and encouraged to secure appropriate medical or other professional help. Such a problem shall not be handled as a disciplinary matter unless the alcoholic employee has refused to recognize his condition and cooperate by seeking help, or treatment has proved unsuccessful. The principal 147

PAGE 157

148 factors that will determine action to be taken by an agency in the case of an alcoholic employee are: (a) the state of the disease; (b) the type of work involved and the morale problem of the work group affected; (c) the desire of the alcoholic to get well as manifested in the steps he takes to secure treatment for his recovery; and (d) progress or lack of progress following appropriate medical treatment. However if public relations or work conditions are obviously and adversely affected by the problem drinker's behavior, his removal from the job shall first be accomplished by his being placed on compulsory leave in accordance with Section 22A-8.12(b), Personnel Rules and Regulations. When an alcoholic's progress is unsatisfactory or he fails to cooperate, subsequent action shall be taken in accordance with the Guidelines for the Treatment of Alcoholics as issued by the Secretary of Administration and the Procedures for Disciplinary Actions, Section 22A-10.3, Personnel Rules and Regulations. All agencies should make every effort to have their supervisory and management personnel take advantage of orientation and training programs on alcoholism as developed by the Department of Health

PAGE 158

149 and Rehabilitative Services in cooperation with the Division of Personnel of the Department of Administration.

PAGE 159

APPENDIX C UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE Procedures for the Treatment of Employees Whose Use of Alcohol Affects Their Job Performance February, 1974 When a University employee's performance is adversely affected by the use of alcohol, the University's commitments to excellence and the general health and welfare of the University community require that corrective action be taken to rehabilitate such employee or to terminate his or her services if rehabilitation cannot be accomplished within a reasonable length of time. It shall be the policy of the University to assist, whenever possible, in the rehabilitation of any such employee. Employees with an alcohol problem are strongly encouraged to discuss the matter with their supervisors, in order that assistance may be provided toward the goal of continued employability . When it appears that an employee's job performance is adversely affected by the use of alcohol, the Provost, with respect to the members of the faculty, and the Vice President for Employee Relations, with respect to all other 150 i

PAGE 160

151 employees, shall conduct such investigation as is necessary to determine if there are sufficient job performance problems to indicate that corrective action is required. 1 . Employees with More than Two Years of Service (or with Tenure ) When the Provost or the Vice President for Employee Relations is satisfied from his investigation that corrective action is required with respect to an employee with more than two years of service, he shall: a. Arrange one or more conferences among the employee, the University Psychiatrist, and the Provost or Vice President for Employee Relations to discuss the employee's problems and the kinds of assistance which are available. b. If, in the opinion of the Provost or the Vice President for Employee Relations, the employee's supervisor, and the University Psychiatrist, the employee has a drinking problem which is adversely affecting job performance, the employee shall become rehabilitated within a reasonable time, either pursuant to counseling and treatment under the auspices of the University Psychiatrist, or through a program of selfrehabilitation, which may include treatment by a psychiatrist retained by the employee at his or her own expense. The role of the University Psychiatrist is to assist the University administration in evaluating

PAGE 161

152 the employee and the circiimstances surrounding the case and to assist and advise the employee in making appropriate treatment arrangements. The University Psychiatrist is not available for treating employees under this policy. If the Employee elects to attempt rehabilitation with the assistance of the University Psychiatrist, or promptly retains an outside psychiatrist, the employee may elect admission, at the University's expense, to a University-selected treatment center for not more than thirty days. If the employee elects admission to the treatment center, he or she shall be placed on a leave-with-pay status. Where applicable, the employee shall utilize accumulated sick leave, earned or accrued vacation days, or approved vacation days. An employee undergoing rehabilitation shall continue normal duties of employment except during the time, if any, when undergoing treatment at a treatment center. If, during the period of rehabilitation, the employee's job performance is adversely affected because of the use of alcohol, leave of absence without pay for 90 days shall be given. During such leave of absence, employees who have not previously availed themselves of treatment in a University-selected treatment center

PAGE 162

153 are eligible for this option for a period not to exceed 30 days, but without pay. If the employee rejects such leave of absence or fails to satisfy the Provost or the Vice President for Employee Relations and the University Psychiatrist that he or she has become rehabilitated during this 90 day period, termination for cause shall occur in accordance with the University procedures established for the employee. During, or at the conclusion of said 90 day period, if, in the opinion of the Provost or the Vice President for Employee Relations and the University Psychiatrist, the employee demonstrates adequate evidence of rehabilitation, the employee shall be permitted to return to his or her position of employment, with the understanding that a recurrence of drinking problems such as to affect job performance shall be cause for termination in accordance with established University procedures. f. If the employee, after rehabilitation, again demonstrates that his or her job performance is adversely affected by use of alcohol, the case shall be handled on an ad hoc basis. g. The University will assvune financial responsibility for confinement to an alcoholic treatment center once only.

PAGE 163

154 h. If terminated for cause under this policy, the employee may apply for reemployment not earlier than one year following termination, and reemployment shall be considered based on circumstances at that time. 2. Employees with Less than Two Years of Service (and Who Do Not Have Tenur"e ) When the Provost or the Vice President for Employee Relations is satisfied from his investigation that corrective action is required with respect to an employee with less than two years of service, each case shall be handled on an individual basis taking into account the seriousness of the problem and the potential value of the employee if rehabilitated. Such an employee may be terminated for cause without attempted rehabilitation, but ordinarily an effort will be made to assist such an employee to become rehabilitated, utilizing the procedures outlined above, except that the University will not ordinarily undertake the expense of treatment at a treatment center and ordinarily will terminate rather than grant a leave of absence to an employee whose job performance is adversely affected by the use of alcohol during the period of probation. Nothing in these procedures abrogates established University policies and procedures for dismissal.

PAGE 164

REFERENCES Banning, J.H. & Kaiser, L. An ecological perspective and model for campus design. The Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1974, 52 (6), 370-375. ^ Baxter, Ann K. Implementation strategies in EAP ' s in higher education: Reaction. Conference Proceedings , August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia : University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978a. Baxter, James. Employee Assistance Programs in historical perspective: The melding of economics and human concerns . Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978b. Belasco, James A. & Trice, Harrison M. The assessment of change in training and therapy . New York: McGrawHill, 1969. Besch, C, Boyle, G., Gott, S., Hutchinson, K. , Riggs , H. A consumer look at EAP ' s : University of Missouri-Columbia personnel, faculty, union, state OPC . Conference Proceedings, August 1-3, 1976, Employee Assis tance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia : University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977. Bronf enbrenner , U. Toward an experimental psychology of Human developing. American Psychologi st, 1977, 32 (7), 513-531. Brown, Robert McAfee. Interpretations and views of students searching for beliefs. NASPA Journa l, 1975, 13 (1), 12-24. Business dries up its alcoholics. Business Week , November 11, 1972, pp. 168-169; 1973. Butler, David. University of Delaware. The whole college catalogue about drinking (DHEW Publication No. [ADM] 76-361). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976. 155

PAGE 165

156 Chalmers, Douglas K. The evaluation of Employee Assistance Programs: Research strategies for program and cost effectiveness. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977 , Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Conyne , Robert K. & Clack, R. James. The consultation intervention model: Directions for action. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1975, 16 (5), 413-417. Crooks ton. Burns B. Human development: Actualizing people in actualizing organizations. Journal of College Student Personnel , 1975a 16 (5), 368-375. Crooks ton. Burns B. Milieu management. NASPA Journal , 1975b, 13 (1) , 45-55. Fromkin, H. & Sherwood, R. , Eds. Integrating the organization . New York: The Free Press, 1974. Gage, N.L. Ends and means in appraising college teaching. In W.J. McKeachie, Ed. The appraisal of teaching in large universities . Ann Arbor : University of Michigan, 1959. Gibb, J.R. Climate for trust formation. In L.P. Bradford, et al., Eds. Group theory and laboratory method . New York: Wiley, 1964. Godwin, Donald F. New directions in occupational programs for NIAAA. Labor-Management Alcoholism Journal , 1977, 7 (1) , 39-43: Goldman, Leo. Toward more meaningful research. The Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1977, 55^ {-) , 373-368 . Gordon, Gerald A. Occupational programming. Michigan Challenge , 1973, 14 (2), 27-28. Greene, Al. Commonalities and uniqueness in implementation strategies. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977 , Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Harlan, V., & Jerrich, L. Is teaching hazardous to your health? Instructor , 1976, 86 (1), 212-214. How industry is handling the problem. Resident and Staff Physician , February, 1976, no vol. no., 106-115.

PAGE 166

157 Insel, P.J. & Moos, R.H. Psychological environment: Expanding the scope of human ecology. American Psychologist , 1974, 29, 179-188. Isaac, Stephen & Michael, William B. Handbook in research and evaluation . San Diego: Robert R. Knapp , 1971. Iscoe, I. Community psychology and the competent community. American Psychologist , 1974 , 29_, 607-613. Johnson, Andrew V. Commonalities and uniqueness in implementation strategies. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Kelley, Keith P. The serendipitous dividends of an employee alcoholism program. Labor-Management Alcoholism Journal , 1977, 39-42. Lasch, Christopher. The narcissistic personality of our time. Partisan Review , 1977, £4 (1), 9-19. Masi, Dale A, Implementation strategies in EAP ' s in higher education. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977 . Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia : University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Masi, D., Elder, W. , & Watts, F. Community based treatment services: A critical factor in EAP success. Conference Proceedings, August 103, 1976, Employee Assis tance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977 . Moomaw, W. Edward. Practices and problems in evaluating instruction. In John A. Centra, Ed., Renewing and evaluating teaching. New directions in higher education (Vol. 5, n. 1). San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1977. Noble, Ernest P. Remarks. Southeastern Occupational Pro gram Training Institute 1 977 Papers. Atlanta: SOPTI, 1977. ' Priorities for post-secondary education in the south: A position statement . Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board, 1977.

PAGE 167

158 Reichman, Walter. Supervisory orientation and training: Issues, techniques, and procedures. Conference Proceedings, August 103, 1976, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977. Ricklefs, Roger. Drinkers at work. The Wall Street Journal , December 1, 1975, pp. 1; 12. Robe, L.B. Rich alcoholics: How dollars buy denial. Addictions , 1977, 2A (2), 42-57. Roman, Paul M. Spirits at work revisited: Needed priorities in occupational alcoholism programming. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Alcoholism Conference of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism . (DHEW Publication No. [ADM] 76-284 ) . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975. Roman, Paul M. Dimensions of current research in occupational alcoholism. Southeastern Occupational Program Training Institute 1977 Papers . Atlanta: SOPTI , 1977a. Roman, Paul M. University based EAP ' s : Their promise and their problems. Conference Proceedings, August 1-3 , 1976, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977b. Roman, Paul M. Adapting Employee Alcoholism and Assistance Programs for college and university faculty. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Rudolph, Frederick. The American college student: From theologian to technocrat in 300 years. NASP A Journal, 1976, 14 (1), 31-39. Schooling, H.W. Welcoming remarks. Conference Proceedings , August 1-3, 1976, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977. Storm, Lindon D., Ed. Solving job performance problems . Tallahassee: Human Conservation Associates, 1977. Sutherland, W. Attacking organization complexity. Fields Within Fields , 1974, 11, 52-65.

PAGE 168

159 Thoresen, Richard W. Cominonalities and uniqueness in implementation strategies. Conference Proceedings , August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Thoresen, R.W. , Knocke , F., Roberts, K., & Pascoe, E. The University of Missouri EAP: Orientation training, referral services, evaluation. Conference Proceedings , August 1-3, 1976, Employee Assistance Programs in higher Education . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977. Trice, H. & Beyer, J. Differential use of an alcoholism policy in federal organizations by skill level of employees. In C. Shranam, Ed. Alcoholism and its treatment in industry . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977. Trice, Harrison M. & Roman, Paul M. Spirits and demons at work: Alcohol and other drugs on the jobs . Ithaca: New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell, 1972. University of Missouri-Columbia. Employee assistance program. Unpublished paper, University of Missouri, 1978. Van de Visse, Martin. The evaluation of administrative performance in higher education: A survey of organized evaluative practices in public and private institutions of Ohio. (Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts Interna tional , 1974, 3^, 7092-A. (University Microfilms No. 75-7468, 204) Wallenfeldt, E.C. Evaluation of the chief administrator: A philosophical-qualitative first step. NASPA Journal, 1976, 13 (4), 5-11. Wattenbarger , James L. Who now has the power? In James L. Wattenbarger & Louis W. Bender, Eds., Improving statewide planning. New directions in higher educa tion (Vol 2, n. 4) . San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1974. White, Joseph M. Introduction. Conference Proceedings , August 7-9, 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher EducatiofT ! Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978.

PAGE 169

160 White, William F. Organizational behavior; Theory and application . Homewood, Illinois: Richard Irwin, Inc., 1969. Williamson, E.G. Societal change: Via violence or peaceful revolution? Journal of College Student Personnel , 1975, 16 (5), 356-367. ~ Wollansky, William D. A multiple approach to faculty evaluation. Education , 1976, 97^ (1), 81-96. Wrich, James. Banquet speech. Conference Proceedings , August 1-3, 1976, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Education^ Columbia^ University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1977. Wrich, James. Employee Assistance Programs: Models and alternatives. Conference Proceedings, August 7-9 , 1977, Employee Assistance Programs in Higher Educa tion . Columbia: University of Missouri and NIAAA, 1978. Yankelovich, Daniel. The new psychological contracts at work. Psychology Today , May, 1978, pp. 46-50.

PAGE 170

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH C. Howard Grimes was born on November 18, 1943, in Nashville, Tennessee. He attended Catholic parochial schools in Nashville where he was graduated from Father Ryan High School in 1961. From 1961 to 1962 he attended Christian Brothers College in Memphis, Tennessee, after which he entered the Roman Catholic Seminary of St. Pius X in Erlanger, Kentucky. Here he received his Bachelor of Arts degree in philosophy in June, 1965. He attended Roman Catholic schools of theology at St. Mary's Seminary in Baltimore, Maryland; St. Mary's University in San Antonio, Texas; and received his Master of Arts degree in theology from St. Louis University in June, 1970. While teaching high school in St. Louis, he met his wife, the former Carolyn Jeanette Casey, and they married in September of 1973. They moved to Gainesville, Florida, immediately thereafter, where he began graduate studies in higher education at the University of Florida. He assumed a position in Student Services at the University between January, 1974, and June, 1976, after which he became Occupational Program Consultant at the North Central Florida Community Mental Health Center. His daughters Allison 161

PAGE 171

162 Claire and Karen Margaret were born September 17, 1976, and November 16, 1978. The Specialist in Education degree in counselor education was completed in March, 1976, at the University of Florida.

PAGE 172

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Harold C. Riker, Chairman Professor of Counselor Education I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. E.L. Tolbert Professor of Counselor Education I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ffimes L. Wattenbarger/ /professor of Educational Administration and Supervision This dissertation was submitted to the Department of Counselor Education in the College of Education and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December, 1980 Dean, Graduate School


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
fcla fda yes
!-- needs assessment for a facultyemployee assistance program in the Florida State University System ( Book ) --
METS:mets OBJID AA00032025_00001
xmlns:METS http:www.loc.govMETS
xmlns:xlink http:www.w3.org1999xlink
xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance
xmlns:daitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss
xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3
xmlns:sobekcm http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm
xmlns:lom http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm_lom
xsi:schemaLocation
http:www.loc.govstandardsmetsmets.xsd
http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss.xsd
http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-4.xsd
http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcmsobekcm.xsd
METS:metsHdr CREATEDATE 2015-06-04T10:21:57Z ID LASTMODDATE 2015-06-04T09:03:41Z RECORDSTATUS COMPLETE
METS:agent ROLE CREATOR TYPE ORGANIZATION
METS:name UF,University of Florida
OTHERTYPE SOFTWARE OTHER
Go UFDC - FDA Preparation Tool
INDIVIDUAL
UFAD\renner
METS:note Online edit by Jane Pen ( 6/4/2015 )
METS:dmdSec DMD1
METS:mdWrap MDTYPE MODS MIMETYPE textxml LABEL Metadata
METS:xmlData
mods:mods
mods:accessCondition The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
mods:genre authority marcgt bibliography
non-fiction
mods:identifier type ALEPH 023432428
OCLC 07240161
mods:language
mods:languageTerm text English
code iso639-2b eng
mods:location
mods:physicalLocation University of Florida
IUF
mods:url access object context http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00032025/00001
mods:name personal
mods:namePart Grimes, C. Howard
given C. Howard
family Grimes
date 1943-
mods:displayForm Claude Howard
mods:role
mods:roleTerm Main Entity
mods:note thesis Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1980.
bibliography Bibliography: leaves 155-160.
Typescript.
Vita.
statement of responsibility by C. Howard Grimes.
mods:originInfo
mods:place
mods:placeTerm marccountry xx
mods:dateIssued 1980
marc 1980
point start 1980
mods:recordInfo
mods:recordIdentifier source sobekcm AA00032025_00001
mods:recordCreationDate 810319
mods:recordOrigin Imported from (ALEPH)023432428
mods:recordContentSource University of Florida
marcorg fug
FUG
mods:languageOfCataloging
English
eng
mods:relatedItem original
mods:physicalDescription
mods:extent ix, 162 leaves : ; 28 cm.
mods:subject SUBJ650_1 lcsh
mods:topic Employee assistance programs
SUBJ650_2
Employees
Counseling of
SUBJ690_1
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
SUBJ690_2
Dissertations, Academic
Counselor Education
mods:geographic UF
mods:titleInfo
mods:nonSort A
mods:title needs assessment for a faculty/employee assistance program in the Florida State University System
mods:typeOfResource text
DMD2
OTHERMDTYPE SOBEKCM SobekCM Custom
sobekcm:procParam
sobekcm:Aggregation ALL
UFIRG
UFIR
UFETD
IUF
VENDOR
VENDORIA
sobekcm:MainThumbnail needsassessmentf00grim_0000thm.jpg
sobekcm:Wordmark UFIR
UF
sobekcm:bibDesc
sobekcm:BibID AA00032025
sobekcm:VID 00001
sobekcm:EncodingLevel I
sobekcm:Source
sobekcm:statement UF University of Florida
sobekcm:SortDate 722814
METS:amdSec
METS:digiprovMD DIGIPROV1
DAITSS Archiving Information
daitss:daitss
daitss:AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT PROJECT UFDC
METS:techMD TECH1
File Technical Details
sobekcm:FileInfo
sobekcm:File fileid JP21 width 2260 height 3291
JPEG1 630 917
JPEG2
JP22 3289
JPEG3 920
JP23 3302
JPEG4
JP24
JPEG5
JP25 3301
JPEG6
JP26
JPEG7
JP27
JPEG8 916
JP28 3285
JPEG9
JP29 3286
JPEG10 919
JP210 2256
JPEG11
JP211 3292
JPEG12 918
JP212 3287
JPEG13
JP213
JPEG14
JP214 3290
JPEG15
JP215
JPEG16
JP216
JPEG17
JP217
JPEG18
JP218
JPEG19
JP219
JPEG20
JP220
JPEG21
JP221 3293
JPEG22
JP222
JPEG23
JP223
JPEG24
JP224
JPEG25
JP225 3288
JPEG26
JP226
JPEG27
JP227
JPEG28
JP228
JPEG29
JP229
JPEG30
JP230
JPEG31
JP231
JPEG32
JP232
JPEG33
JP233
JPEG34
JP234
JPEG35
JP235
JPEG36
JP236
JPEG37
JP237
JPEG38
JP238
JPEG39
JP239 3294
JPEG40
JP240
JPEG41
JP241
JPEG42
JP242 3296
JPEG43
JP243
JPEG44
JP244
JPEG45
JP245
JPEG46
JP246
JPEG47
JP247
JPEG48
JP248
JPEG49
JP249
JPEG50
JP250
JPEG51
JP251
JPEG52
JP252 3295
JPEG53
JP253
JPEG54
JP254
JPEG55
JP255
JPEG56
JP256 2264
JPEG57
JP257
JPEG58
JP258
JPEG59 914
JP259
JPEG60
JP260
JPEG61
JP261
JPEG62
JP262
JPEG63
JP263
JPEG64
JP264
JPEG65
JP265
JPEG66
JP266
JPEG67
JP267
JPEG68
JP268 2268 3297
JPEG69
JP269
JPEG70 915
JP270
JPEG71 913
JP271
JPEG72
JP272
JPEG73
JP273
JPEG74
JP274
JPEG75
JP275 2272
JPEG76
JP276
JPEG77
JP277
JPEG78
JP278
JPEG79
JP279
JPEG80
JP280
JPEG81
JP281 3298
JPEG82
JP282 3299
JPEG83
JP283 2276
JPEG84 938
JP284 2224 3313
JPEG85 936
JP285 3305
JPEG86 934
JP286 2220
JPEG87 932
JP287
JPEG88
JP288
JPEG89 935
JP289
JPEG90
JP290
JPEG91
JP291
JPEG92 933
JP292
JPEG93
JP293
JPEG94
JP294
JPEG95
JP295
JPEG96
JP296
JPEG97
JP297
JPEG98
JP298
JPEG99
JP299
JPEG100
JP2100 2228 3307
JPEG101
JP2101 3306
JPEG102 931
JP2102
JPEG103 930
JP2103
JPEG104 929
JP2104
JPEG105
JP2105
JPEG106
JP2106
JPEG107
JP2107
JPEG108
JP2108 2232
JPEG109 928
JP2109
JPEG110
JP2110
JPEG111
JP2111
JPEG112
JP2112
JPEG113
JP2113
JPEG114 927
JP2114 2236
JPEG115
JP2115
JPEG116
JP2116
JPEG117
JP2117
JPEG118
JP2118
JPEG119
JP2119
JPEG120
JP2120
JPEG121
JP2121
JPEG122 925
JP2122 2240
JPEG123 926
JP2123
JPEG124
JP2124 3303
JPEG125 923
JP2125 2244
JPEG126
JP2126
JPEG127
JP2127
JPEG128 924
JP2128
JPEG129
JP2129
JPEG130
JP2130
JPEG131 921
JP2131 2248
JPEG132
JP2132
JPEG133 922
JP2133
JPEG134
JP2134
JPEG135
JP2135
JPEG136
JP2136
JPEG137
JP2137 2252
JPEG138
JP2138
JPEG139
JP2139
JPEG140
JP2140
JPEG141
JP2141
JPEG142
JP2142
JPEG143
JP2143
JPEG144
JP2144
JPEG145
JP2145
JPEG146
JP2146
JPEG147
JP2147
JPEG148
JP2148
JPEG149
JP2149 3284
JPEG150
JP2150
JPEG151
JP2151
JPEG152
JP2152
JPEG153
JP2153
JPEG154
JP2154
JPEG155
JP2155
JPEG156
JP2156 3308
JPEG157
JP2157 3309
JPEG158
JP2158
JPEG159
JP2159
JPEG160
JP2160
JPEG161
JP2161
JPEG162
JP2162
JPEG163
JP2163
JPEG164 910
JP2164 2280
JPEG165
JP2165
JPEG166 905
JP2166 3276
JPEG167 906
JP2167 2284
JPEG168 907
JP2168
JPEG169
JP2169
JPEG170
JP2170 2288
JPEG171
JP2171
JPEG172
JP2172
METS:fileSec
METS:fileGrp USE archive
METS:file GROUPID G1 TIF1 imagetiff CHECKSUM 89ae21ecfd4a6b9d185e4bc1c72c4819 CHECKSUMTYPE MD5 SIZE 22325568
METS:FLocat LOCTYPE OTHERLOCTYPE SYSTEM xlink:href needsassessmentf00grim_0000.tif
G2 TIF2 1bf557c8fd7d9c1ec77ed1d3a2327d57 22311368
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.tif
G3 TIF3 5289124ff128ac8183de88f859ead3f7 22399612
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.tif
G4 TIF4 68d0d1788e83c0bec8fe43d14f68ddae 22402424
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.tif
G5 TIF5 1f2bc400367d975ac423cbc24cef45cd 22393056
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.tif
G6 TIF6 95c6f8f90190010d326ea2be3a030e4f 22313772
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.tif
G7 TIF7 b9b94c7b7fd553681478e0383c27810c 22393952
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.tif
G8 TIF8 fe8c04e3024fc4cb7f0e07f6fe2bb258 22286940
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.tif
G9 TIF9 28d0bea4034c514fbd54a9d8c2c76d59 22294340
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.tif
G10 TIF10 8bb62aeb8b49f7da8696690209250177 22288264
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.tif
G11 TIF11 d9dc1bd09dd195de3fd0d1e89968c80c 22295236
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.tif
G12 TIF12 f58811d9d78db73f406b4fdb1acb5e41 22261480
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.tif
G13 TIF13 5f03a9800541247a50ec898d8a760905 22295400
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.tif
G14 TIF14 e84ae75b461be538a49ec16bf4f10f16 22281812
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.tif
G15 TIF15 e9da56b126a828204ef15530cb54ffba 22274776
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.tif
G16 TIF16 6d94012b93e5d720a2a2767debc101d5 22248136
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.tif
G17 TIF17 8028cf4b600083cdc9910ebf4f6f19cb 22261788
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.tif
G18 TIF18 2985c21f008d527ee973086701e0a1ad 22275212
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.tif
G19 TIF19 09e024d944b0e1f2c75586d723d16770 22275076
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.tif
G20 TIF20 0b39a0dbd9afa74eb8e59dbef8ba42f5 22295620
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.tif
G21 TIF21 ebae946c27db7083d4e41e1bf06161a1 22301552
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.tif
G22 TIF22 167e8cbe195d8fa7766e8defae5e4dc4 22288552
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.tif
G23 TIF23 b3b195e577b356988f321da8d32fa7b3 22281960
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.tif
G24 TIF24 e458484904c0f997878b4a8e54856c5a 22274680
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.tif
G25 TIF25 243cc9e58eaf18cd51eca64c2b5a78be 22267748
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.tif
G26 TIF26 f810fcbb31a98a90f2c615d641104701 22282076
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.tif
G27 TIF27 b01c13f9253a7eff2b42d0aed098b01c 22295140
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.tif
G28 TIF28 a245575e412a39cc9e13b6ec96bb7cf6 22295136
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.tif
G29 TIF29 deffb7026f45a8ef35c884b83e568115 22274060
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.tif
G30 TIF30 aad00235f986d6c6badd76e689a3e971 22287696
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.tif
G31 TIF31 e040f281f620d368c037348bc120f401 22282184
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.tif
G32 TIF32 3ce2ca04f37f35e8091aa53723e2fe5d 22295176
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.tif
G33 TIF33 95896bdef89d44457fb9089cf2c48eed 22288548
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.tif
G34 TIF34 dca6187e2f8b1537a9749e4080fb2a44 22301952
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.tif
G35 TIF35 116b3842b6ae80d5425d3cacb416cc25 22295588
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.tif
G36 TIF36 1e26727db9f8b952dc5c9079331510c9 22301784
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.tif
G37 TIF37 7929b1020e59f41b326a1a99a4a12313 22281992
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.tif
G38 TIF38 0e63d6752b5b10ee7e7769c2f4765c6e 22301468
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.tif
G39 TIF39 31fe100083224af60d599374a18a39d2 22309168
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.tif
G40 TIF40 21e8e41938e3bc577cae8e9325ce3af7 22308544
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.tif
G41 TIF41 d51f1e602fac2e8501b9e775c68054be 22302388
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.tif
G42 TIF42 7fbb1eb5e8e286ca596aed21eb4f13bb 22322436
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.tif
G43 TIF43 9ab4bf42503fa8393a531911a7cf3c6e 22348192
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.tif
G44 TIF44 9b609e145d813f070e6d2dda731a3749 22348272
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.tif
G45 TIF45 bf6ac38afa3eb55ef2bff7a78d07c947 22313952
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.tif
G46 TIF46 9a693f381b122b6bdd8206cccae8e6f2 22313956
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.tif
G47 TIF47 3c34c2f1fbf5f0f6d1d15e23a8cff422 22341208
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.tif
G48 TIF48 a61c8158ea09637555552cd04f54b6da 22348572
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.tif
G49 TIF49 0e69595109debcea4bfbd3aa55703319 22334796
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.tif
G50 TIF50 d3a30b928a05156c1b3965f20f6cd1f0 22341308
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.tif
G51 TIF51 44072585aa75a62244d9bd868aafb697 22348168
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.tif
G52 TIF52 a16d78e3c5b178f77453b3638aaa31c6 22355252
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.tif
G53 TIF53 17540ab23d765b00c8e440954f4a7814 22362112
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.tif
G54 TIF54 c31e30ebeb30ba7e73904fa2fdac9c39 22341252
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.tif
G55 TIF55 2f0e3d569320fe0ac7c6bf2386ba1b53 22327812
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.tif
G56 TIF56 5ff002285f2c5cd4afee37f659ef34bd 22388012
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.tif
G57 TIF57 3edb9bd98b1e97a9f5bcf59c125b1fb9 22362104
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.tif
G58 TIF58 f437065bf83c456c038610179f416057 22394712
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.tif
G59 TIF59 f29d8dff1526157245335f4b39fc4102 22333380
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.tif
G60 TIF60 8f44514c6650de6890a92ad5a3c53374 22401308
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.tif
G61 TIF61 fd146adda1a31f5506c1fda22fde3a5c 22394736
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.tif
G62 TIF62 4860ee32dacf97cc8a7059feb8ba2cf3 22380792
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.tif
G63 TIF63 8e59c93c80e9797838425d733eb1a21c 22394744
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.tif
G64 TIF64 c64c2cceb2f2bf728566d487ebe683b4 22381148
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.tif
G65 TIF65 d5569091015578b169eb6725f4d42d94 22394692
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.tif
G66 TIF66 8c2d7399c354f561daf8dc7aac3e7145 22394804
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.tif
G67 TIF67 cfc06b2b16172438746993a0aae1a2ad 22401232
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.tif
G68 TIF68 c9dbb5972aecb41273db484f5de20b65 22448008
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.tif
G69 TIF69 e55fe6a97aa40325afa2f1af57b53be9 22447860
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.tif
G70 TIF70 6a4930c32288af72bc7c0696f7f18e1a 22427284
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.tif
G71 TIF71 9aa09ba5ef147d41114d5b5bd16d5002 22365716
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.tif
G72 TIF72 4b4cc9e0daa7869e4ce83fe5ac398b8d 22441328
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.tif
G73 TIF73 2f45d1b4dbb156bf814c9004ecb8faf8 22434084
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.tif
G74 TIF74 c936a57625a2eb644b3158f02ff16a17 22441272
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.tif
G75 TIF75 ee012283947df48efb5a1be16329bdd1 22473948
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.tif
G76 TIF76 1720a09215d0effcda80273527d79780 22466972
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.tif
G77 TIF77 7a0efc6404916c6a6b3b42fe85fc851c 22473904
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.tif
G78 TIF78 989098424a4927149b811588b354f0e9 22452872
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.tif
G79 TIF79 043b954923784865d16c63da95f5afaf 22480272
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.tif
G80 TIF80 e8732212e40f42f073e0a805bd769d62 22480924
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.tif
G81 TIF81 0d5b630ee8c163d6c63d81e2ba00a972 22494252
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.tif
G82 TIF82 b0a93719d2a050c9cc8cde8b00546735 22501240
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.tif
G83 TIF83 013954cd436ea1ba8d1a2e78bb42506b 22540268
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.tif
G84 TIF84 ffbb050c687ab94a761e68787606daf9 22119528
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.tif
G85 TIF85 1cc455683a0ed24069c4dddea72db72a 22066256
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.tif
G86 TIF86 7b75f9368df3190478f733dcd39708ee 21939912
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.tif
G87 TIF87 213a6b7de26b187b55adbe332f0a93d7 21965724
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.tif
G88 TIF88 cd261cedf428a74930f0fc063c99afbc 22006072
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.tif
G89 TIF89 316eac3073b8f2b28878130a8db96233 21946160
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.tif
G90 TIF90 29ce95b950c7d4c50ca4c9fd0c4b8786 21972696
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.tif
G91 TIF91 b379122603e7262a42bbd57b0cbaaaf5 22012176
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.tif
G92 TIF92 eb50ae252062effce20e77314bb357b1 21979348
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.tif
G93 TIF93 3d0a125ff22973570c4814e429650946 21999408
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.tif
G94 TIF94 4e8a08dad6856f95f3330f4a225f9031 21992264
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.tif
G95 TIF95 e79fc7e8d525c3b813d2b60c07b359d9 21978840
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.tif
G96 TIF96 0900dc9cc2903e4dc14f26a36d608c37 21999172
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.tif
G97 TIF97 ce861d9724c02c2d1fc6887deab8753b 22012720
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.tif
G98 TIF98 aa9925bcd229fece1d8e73654ca45c76 21959344
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.tif
G99 TIF99 3d406f11b12a759f8712ba8a51348483 21992428
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.tif
G100 TIF100 6db8a7024653c4f701039afabd1ad14f 22118804
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.tif
G101 TIF101 108a31e946b58ad2119719128dd125df 22112332
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.tif
G102 TIF102 01053ff2d9369b27c55878af9db9ebc1 22018524
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.tif
G103 TIF103 408a050665cc5b4b6753fd7015e6ad37 22005488
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.tif
G104 TIF104 14226d3e9d248f113a2351106d9c76be 21985344
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.tif
G105 TIF105 a5ad8e6ca38eea1a47dc23112393c5b9 22032232
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.tif
G106 TIF106 4a260d777be82d16477e14a508e0798a 21990588
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.tif
G107 TIF107 a1c0f057d12a18fda400823f97cab17b 21984696
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.tif
G108 TIF108 1df63055be4820ebeac5a06cac8dd651 22051444
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.tif
G109 TIF109 6764b7bbfac27bf8f576aefb688b8b0f 22024888
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.tif
G110 TIF110 e051f6e31768303829bb1111873acc81 22064880
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.tif
G111 TIF111 d218b67bc109859209e21e00b10b7439 22065036
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.tif
G112 TIF112 11ca552c86aac7d39c8024eacfd24fb9 22058380
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.tif
G113 TIF113 658d73746f178661b16e5138c020a8ff 22071804
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.tif
G114 TIF114 77249c22fd988889c725f646c6934ed0 22084164
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.tif
G115 TIF115 10b367fd5defb25b5ce7afe6a54c376f 22097744
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.tif
G116 TIF116 f581b9ff041c197a6b1a9676b70c8fa3 22117948
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.tif
G117 TIF117 700a65e87ec0993af40c4db4848ec3e6 22096080
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.tif
G118 TIF118 75668d577819703f92f276525e653c5c 22110852
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.tif
G119 TIF119 e53f52a9584c63b8c4200811fed0b997 22124196
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.tif
G120 TIF120 dcf05138827425f062d8487b23fe50fd 22122580
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.tif
G121 TIF121 620b07bbd1791230dc4a919a8b39bee7 22118128
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.tif
G122 TIF122 262d73c12342e7a2929558b8a4a428e5 22117224
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.tif
G123 TIF123 5abcc72f6a255223e776a01e35f5994c 22135020
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.tif
G124 TIF124 56e0f17ad890fd9274954ac632e5ff95 22210220
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.tif
G125 TIF125 721504cf74aaf05286f3ae1531a8422e 22155628
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.tif
G126 TIF126 18e25d55e9e975b11e58066fe459e57b 22135496
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.tif
G127 TIF127 996ee7fe78d24a4b2420bf63404cc33f 22155380
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.tif
G128 TIF128 f4ffa28d2551d2aae13bb838d6786487 22170144
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.tif
G129 TIF129 c69a1d018d5b73315e684fa7012bf8a7 22170220
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.tif
G130 TIF130 b4a7d4e13e5704c650ec38457240d1fc 22156204
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.tif
G131 TIF131 d3c634a98a68b1a1671ade005ed1f075 22168640
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.tif
G132 TIF132 90d3f8f3e90b5f1f8d168e4ff89a7661 22236284
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.tif
G133 TIF133 582bb27100d0a85bead9fff06678c764 22200944
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.tif
G134 TIF134 737accb389f0be1287f7287e6383d8b0 22213916
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.tif
G135 TIF135 8b7214d4f3cb325198dc6977f09ae48e 22209708
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.tif
G136 TIF136 66c4a7dac34c098fe391559fe8988efe 22209600
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.tif
G137 TIF137 b14bf279418e6b055f249e9312d2b201 22269128
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.tif
G138 TIF138 d355904d1ec2e7290838aa7539277741 22241064
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.tif
G139 TIF139 7f6ddb3b90181af1212f3c3543f971d4 22268920
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.tif
G140 TIF140 ef0a5981223879f5e6b393aa965846a5 22262392
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.tif
G141 TIF141 476a30f974b454a984aaeae4b5a52012 22249168
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.tif
G142 TIF142 2a5f46bc16083a9ca9adde1274d1daa8 22302124
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.tif
G143 TIF143 1502b99dc738183b3a6d38d2ac58ae07 22274884
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.tif
G144 TIF144 8779b8f77ed478bb8893af4d40fc31bb 22315492
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.tif
G145 TIF145 74623b74a4df5b5baecedc767d264e79 22302268
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.tif
G146 TIF146 d2146586d9ec04b3de66b67ec963da39 22293852
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.tif
G147 TIF147 04038fc746172f33e2f4caab8b28290b 22300476
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.tif
G148 TIF148 7118285b7b39d3c25d107d3b1038d3c4 22314296
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.tif
G149 TIF149 41165ee4266e7ce820c4c7b616fc7b6c 22280360
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.tif
G150 TIF150 42c4e3243b9abcc4666116ed9aa41139 22314628
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.tif
G151 TIF151 8199c296bffca0db0797c6ec33e520c1 22305364
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.tif
G152 TIF152 f83f716246119ac562d5ce12ceddf97e 22360708
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.tif
G153 TIF153 ee142fe849e138869b67927a68664797 22360868
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.tif
G154 TIF154 bf00863e64efdf6ccae8439e42897ffb 22556644
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.tif
G155 TIF155 81a2bd961a1e8e81b0bf066a39daa1d2 22513872
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.tif
G156 TIF156 685dd85788622898d2b0129765c9b855 22522208
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.tif
G157 TIF157 32d9092680a9669628464f2b072a2a2c 22529304
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.tif
G158 TIF158 ed3b71b436488e412800363cdd149c39 22370024
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.tif
G159 TIF159 c73123d788b09d891c87f1c025dd6c1e 22413416
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.tif
G160 TIF160 171685aa7efa0c73f319934bf201eae9 22555584
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.tif
G161 TIF161 e7f3dc3d9181a85a954fa5e1c7bbdd0d 22542020
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.tif
G162 TIF162 18f12abb4c70c89b03cd65099c941cb3 22595076
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.tif
G163 TIF163 e9c177ba6e8ba4a51325b2315cb24d58 22636060
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.tif
G164 TIF164 9da45d6d16b7f63edf1a1cca6acf0cec 22552384
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.tif
G165 TIF165 bdb0796ee8e0a4d8b90fa4bd588e6a87 22621140
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.tif
G166 TIF166 b02360f6df5a344bf0600060b11ef64b 22422688
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.tif
G167 TIF167 53c5c2a2f187e38faffc897696358e0c 22523728
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.tif
G168 TIF168 c2794157b3d80b92299b32c7315e7cb1 22537364
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.tif
G169 TIF169 c278f0de0206575d3fbee41e760a5b13 22522448
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.tif
G170 TIF170 90c1a85213558cfe9d6f4a609b857aa0 22611272
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.tif
G171 TIF171 b68d41d515973bcac146ab54677dbda0 22567448
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.tif
G172 TIF172 be548efb4e4c095547f827ce8e1fd155 22562924
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.tif
reference
imagejp2 52a866db0a347970f6e9bc334de2074c 181850
needsassessmentf00grim_0000.jp2
e2f5427720451f961346f1193438221f 34674
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.jp2
be9596b6f2a0f568e653593b4346a327 52937
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.jp2
08a61e1137766bd2ef55b36b1b30e0d3 560089
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.jp2
a40990f4ddb0df61cae236fcda213646 88767
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.jp2
c0f0110581abeeac0a0b1b049c2bfedb 498932
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.jp2
129197c9dc1330e424a785f05c9ff4bc 275440
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.jp2
d03786a09becc66e5540e9e0daabbba2 624683
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.jp2
884b62797ac34db47d47848215aada2d 712459
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.jp2
84fbfa75c2db2f372bef4e9c6f2161e9 618931
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.jp2
0071bd4969ee504b43ff232f96462c1d 667775
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.jp2
65bd143c0460b58aacf5dc9a6a758b1f 777058
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.jp2
731b70acc1696ed1801ee03048b47ff8 670488
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.jp2
d554808afb1f47314bf1bf8346f258b5 763941
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.jp2
ea352317f0abd231e82969e17665cfd0 656647
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.jp2
261ce12a4625260e3eaf024353504e94 693860
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.jp2
fa9a004d076d7fd4c0eee13a1c40db3a 719925
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.jp2
6da6c051e8f60dedf371a4bd8fad8adc 768748
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.jp2
8f35938eb52aa42db9f0b1c22cbe8656 758210
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.jp2
8d65d69f57490222afe08f5443224bdd 733583
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.jp2
21081049766de8020cb1d17226350827 547741
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.jp2
45253e6d34c62d98b596637af6b313ab 658494
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.jp2
f68467473b235d510dd397cacc451d5b 717813
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.jp2
5843c5bbe7eaf44ee9835ff41d3f7125 563926
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.jp2
e16fdf918614a189419587913da09d32 553244
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.jp2
cbcbdc4a3ba17e0b0ba34d4f1607bca4 736599
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.jp2
4c6ab37e6f79783e451434cb1afe8a67 670259
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.jp2
f88efb53db1864846b84a9605639dd22 645353
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.jp2
9f6e686c4f26c4cc6fb2c3e64393aed1 461624
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.jp2
b0e2603dde35dd6c44303f9deeb7193d 545789
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.jp2
38c23358f5c35eba6fc24c8aee7ff500 753261
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.jp2
cf5b9a38585e7e6f2d254a427d585697 675642
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.jp2
581acb9816d5ea1eb6b425f6da116b00 655307
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.jp2
9ca5fb9654687b87cd2b19f29e6e22bd 655480
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.jp2
726b4a0bb8095bf5a83e4e79377a69dc 709177
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.jp2
d7bdeb03626f9107ffae6a48de004b5f 659632
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.jp2
9057b058c495e9446d0c8c4003d7a951 721301
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.jp2
ba9a84b0e04a2735ba3e8f9bfe935eb5 597364
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.jp2
1af74864cebaedfcf89a61ff09b54c87 700945
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.jp2
d880e683c10ba6ae6d12d6f8f84a0696 670360
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.jp2
d671f0e45f6150a49b10be7a4824a910 714911
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.jp2
0e23e797f0c8db8079dbc2173a7dcde5 675935
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.jp2
61d535cfff29ed15c40e8f907175cc17 672519
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.jp2
955350c7698e67892ac3e25c197a37a0 600022
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.jp2
f8d55c18615f04b661e11b84f8b33366 591380
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.jp2
fdcd022241d16c95d47d3cbd517ad518 616432
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.jp2
9ad9c836136d8d6ae43197b9b2d30fbc 656883
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.jp2
6240911811174e9ea442164232e0046e 732673
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.jp2
62cb23dcea73a14c608c44c4ef2e88be 652037
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.jp2
868b3cdec13b9b017b77eddec5a06195 617036
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.jp2
3e90d3bf42322c2d00a4334e8afb0b87 675985
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.jp2
c391a5876c65e5d78f699f069abe09c7 711340
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.jp2
3ab4d275b5b9ccc87f624dfd5b212cb9 699127
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.jp2
c1e3ca5ce79553d398962992ef8832d3 633410
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.jp2
0852a831ea053e7588400c4ddc78ee75 653016
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.jp2
d00e2d22a3628ca9f4f6b533b9ec624f 670079
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.jp2
5e2746643064146c76e17b9015d36c84 743847
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.jp2
b28138422b3aaba48bd1c1e1f2c99acb 686034
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.jp2
57cfa35196034721196b048253f7c70c 692766
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.jp2
b4e9b8369a74582b6470342df2db1d67 611976
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.jp2
2e12de5ed61e0ae3e51fa741e5789479 691148
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.jp2
5b0c0511929cd5987f89dae57b8a0022 651552
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.jp2
c07f726db54b638e6b2f0efe10d91652 691260
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.jp2
f3905c59667dc7f22969a32c9a91be10 702185
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.jp2
c9391389fcccd06789b5984fefcb07c6 680355
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.jp2
42936bcfee1ca6371288ffc0f4009b55 685717
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.jp2
ab7a04e290457ebfc56a9b3f12b97141 647449
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.jp2
dd01a2626616d35e9dfcea6a39c2417c 724318
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.jp2
c705802b8f41226a816661eb98f9d8e6 654650
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.jp2
07f26faebb5cc1054c936b92d440ec8e 649327
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.jp2
30cee4a72e670dbc8d8b3b7dfa9a30fb 685990
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.jp2
57c7f7ac97e04e345bddd6860d171519 714364
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.jp2
361a00d749f6bef692701132244fbbfe 668575
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.jp2
c7f30c3de1ba83a4768b35a464d796da 681322
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.jp2
fd2bb2c2f81f9929966dd3b9f1b250a2 764513
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.jp2
3e0ad03f9218ffe06cd9ac84411dad2c 625663
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.jp2
fef94ff92806514a2fc45aa89915325a 701663
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.jp2
deeae734229ff34f41a36e748a358fe2 583329
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.jp2
6ada3e47c2942622ef2908920e16ccc7 667880
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.jp2
e125b9141ecbd532802a937a47c8b1cf 722821
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.jp2
760299b16d9e270125132d3b1a111cd5 706822
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.jp2
6c3389fba3adade4c01b2e9c1ec4c98d 719017
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.jp2
c09afd21bb88bfaf9e15be2253cdabcb 684040
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.jp2
dfd9daad1fbe45a5dc8e3e636995810b 739302
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.jp2
164b55ed7641aa80a8742617bb7702e3 720049
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.jp2
b60da59942dfe1ae4d7338d729ec829e 693479
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.jp2
0c38c8a8248a17021fe1c5048134d3b0 628095
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.jp2
9d986678412d029abeec434a37713bc4 696161
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.jp2
b922866ad230f087b7308fbf66962c9f 636302
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.jp2
bf2abd0349e7cf7cb34ec4ff9647f340 698485
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.jp2
43993de7f48fee05da83e63903416b8c 643786
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.jp2
b8c37aa8a1b2e4e9ea83b7d98c1b359f 722166
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.jp2
b23a64289efa6d3a4f933c4847cf181e 734428
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.jp2
65ec3a5b37310dc661e5a4036d44814d 619746
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.jp2
45b0e35f5090ab7bc8c7c6582955bb79 655105
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.jp2
69d353b95917937d9a6e9c98a0b9ca71 655298
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.jp2
b5412df46154a8c24dc71a2f613b131d 679761
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.jp2
1f813d1b7ef66a2b91a5ce7e6c03cf87 690122
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.jp2
eafd6b711aeccf425534fbecc66fcd4e 723731
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.jp2
e2b6ea046dfb1c2bcd461b073f822f7f 721882
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.jp2
ce5c827bb02a2167c5c134c2e51b60aa 697113
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.jp2
a9e4d63ed3f5df6d8b5c8d6ad9e15be2 682203
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.jp2
c926f149596f1bf8ce306b80c8e65ba6 739049
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.jp2
22a9822405b377676148225459f25984 731490
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.jp2
b8f3015c322d8d6c50d393869adce064 718806
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.jp2
2473fd382529215f2d7266f1f8a8ba4b 405728
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.jp2
4a2e21c2b98e8a121aa3b1222ac9d837 538892
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.jp2
3130e2bdc499e3da6ece863b16ec5bfb 656163
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.jp2
e47fbed71560dee6ef0a242fc2afdbb1 680700
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.jp2
7a99caee7b61f576bc230db7d9d53c27 655065
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.jp2
bc3261afe99d57d88725a17f286242a7 710545
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.jp2
3fbe93e710061609cf0c587d6b647939 702958
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.jp2
75f93839d4c99d957e79b314c23541cc 736235
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.jp2
a9eb9adc7eb39b3aab62476d9b55a1ad 637477
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.jp2
8981b2559e0a680daad8f41c33477399 634301
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.jp2
4b76b08d0e0e5c8f871b9c396c7f8a34 683370
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.jp2
ce79628031b28452cc3bd0b57b448f1a 343852
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.jp2
29437b244d0bc43090ac0cea4bc602f1 577065
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.jp2
224900a594accf08b78cb9cb116f78da 469010
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.jp2
5848d2838efc529161cd83c97790fbee 237754
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.jp2
47f52ead938485411ae6e8eb211eea9f 731884
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.jp2
78abfbe6342bc9252c9e6331c0d9464a 689374
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.jp2
863af63d9f7e9b436427e85ef671e561 176202
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.jp2
57499263c1482207fa8bc3116e7eb7a9 375070
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.jp2
10a08f32f90d3c3115f0e4d248178a3f 335702
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.jp2
14563b77357b025d95cae7fcf3175f3f 372331
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.jp2
9539c3200a01b8d626ebaba8c53dc27c 310340
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.jp2
3dc33117253b906a02fbc6fd613a099c 704259
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.jp2
361697be361f246d73eeb514e61c4051 706524
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.jp2
af560c2194b46592dfebe8bd964bf56b 631866
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.jp2
2055ffb7c5dbca55ca40d0a61c5c5486 420326
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.jp2
535b7a4ff77e3136159426e043666fc0 481966
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.jp2
d118ab99a820d5e2b684db82874797f0 241947
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.jp2
114db613225d3f4e4a1e75fb2e8d44af 161073
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.jp2
b641347b5aa76687533d23aa361c3065 671933
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.jp2
bf0e20f6fca100363f7bc2433c5cf515 661590
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.jp2
686528d7f5e9510412b64b9146a25847 671485
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.jp2
8fd9e3a3b882eb4387b1863e02ded332 423914
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.jp2
e2302699043417b180d3d2a4cbb8aded 593781
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.jp2
241edd8475a5a76af831dad876adfdae 648941
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.jp2
458f122af765813dda94fcb6c0d2c253 675846
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.jp2
f56dbca4564b133f16c98d4446da00ad 699805
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.jp2
c0904a17be748a457ba8ac6ddd5b07fc 650439
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.jp2
03018b8141efca889aad6d092c5d9069 671335
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.jp2
90eb2f663fa41c5876821912d2e66d92 681897
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.jp2
960bfe8558e841c083058fe5fbde1cb1 574694
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.jp2
bff8dd0ce7a1bf947c0c3085bf794b08 606708
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.jp2
5db9d672352cdbc3ab669e34b2bd00c4 653453
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.jp2
8dea2c32a79f096f5567daafd1bebd59 625923
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.jp2
d554bbdef565a0418e6405109fb17b8a 686736
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.jp2
5421af941812cfbca84c320454451ce3 194493
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.jp2
3834d458e66870078f9e67cc02cfa426 845842
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.jp2
78c9aa2925ec4635ce4e1bbfa7d1ea73 727968
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.jp2
0719ab8025b646650443b821a0c60817 586123
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.jp2
a9f9b69f26d7a7a8e24d3b1400e183cf 258658
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.jp2
00640a6c2cae25fa9a140fa7fd1ba7cb 564776
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.jp2
39650ea74c5043a315f549c09223c953 637861
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.jp2
1502a6c80db8e9510eb39221984cadb0 74530
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.jp2
194daad7313e76cfea9ee78233cf1c1b 545380
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.jp2
1c5dda906d2842ab1ac70b6594cee83e 666096
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.jp2
fce5b4a2ee4b1d6859b9dc9ab0473e91 636987
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.jp2
278fedf54512aa4871a27988ee14f82e 614172
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.jp2
38202d10c6405a29665eb9d839946d59 647632
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.jp2
5a0a99cb5a7f0d2a9340c6c3c0c9548d 787848
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.jp2
d7910edc9aec3f1546862d27c12c0e8a 854162
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.jp2
8a8a82e89a171442b1abfb64df724413 822792
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.jp2
eb453e1a4dcbfe09c4a4ba8bc89cb329 874452
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.jp2
b798aaec23ea31cb9c928f2e94a3b396 859337
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.jp2
c4d3e378397c2c65a1e3e42190cab383 438210
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.jp2
b602c106319c6be4521818864c8987ff 595571
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.jp2
9565582cf1f4e3017933531c18dff034 120198
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.jp2
ce02bfc60f7c480f7ec9ece1b8a32a26 612165
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.jp2
imagejpeg 1d5c33f96a00dfb544685f03109d46cf 45063
needsassessmentf00grim_0000.jpg
JPEG1.2 107d573d8cbf258cec21c238a6cecfb9 22006
needsassessmentf00grim_0000.QC.jpg
5563f6002d74cdd4d00fcfaecbf40ab8 19579
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.jpg
JPEG2.2 100226949a7d872f723114e9f4919e19 14282
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.QC.jpg
2cfc941f85a15b11be6e740e6218e9d5 21720
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.jpg
JPEG3.2 b11a9bd7912e754d9fa8ecdfd6b8e7df 15605
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.QC.jpg
e29f6c81fd0bb2a508199d882dc0ea6a 111458
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.jpg
JPEG4.2 6c14db30a2c7e41ff70a398778004f7d 49585
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.QC.jpg
e8d3def66dc12c72dafcc2ac2709af8f 27302
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.jpg
JPEG5.2 82371e36a0d662f92adef7d7b7482b87 17354
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.QC.jpg
1e82c2ef2a83342de36411595f026eff 105360
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.jpg
JPEG6.2 603a3db8c360a4fb22d1e36be84e094e 47302
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.QC.jpg
f2f2af8a75c8ea8a459b1aeff55de6fa 59799
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.jpg
JPEG7.2 ce0f3966dd9f95101b3b52fcd9f90203 30818
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.QC.jpg
caa10319386e4ab58159078dbfc628e7 123624
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.jpg
JPEG8.2 697f7afbf48a2aab532819549c2f6112 50651
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.QC.jpg
d2175014ef55d6e5714b692c8636d3f9 135625
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.jpg
JPEG9.2 31ebe04d0c03f2edabd7b69ee26b1099 57274
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.QC.jpg
51e96981b3752b46bfeeac5cf73bff4a 121492
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.jpg
JPEG10.2 182c056217aff0e5d26dcb53ff653f0e 52837
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.QC.jpg
d1b8bd310523c9ec953d21ff093cd482 128530
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.jpg
JPEG11.2 f9d59d383f60c8bf3bc6681124a1415a 55309
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.QC.jpg
cd8f3cefb1635c0d8a1fc8a9021e68aa 146112
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.jpg
JPEG12.2 9125a13c5e79cdf9605eb7710756dcfd 54998
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.QC.jpg
4a71b419afba4cae5ba10665e9ae2054 130087
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.jpg
JPEG13.2 51d3cd76decfed127275e8e939f43110 55871
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.QC.jpg
6330de6c876388a38d2672f4cdf36241 146994
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.jpg
JPEG14.2 e67ab85b1e684e356ee6e417312a9a68 56225
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.QC.jpg
e75fe2cee730a9059f933a07fad1faff 130520
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.jpg
JPEG15.2 849d8f6a7447b7eb0caa9627273ed60a 55779
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.QC.jpg
196591777ed2c3b316b450c771107a69 133273
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.jpg
JPEG16.2 c86ee5b505b3b6336eeece6e68489979 57711
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.QC.jpg
bee8a205b02479e06b1391ab37590226 140522
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.jpg
JPEG17.2 ca73d694eeec3f8ad3c6fc855e276cfe 57898
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.QC.jpg
5cabeeda0ef7779c1c4443dde066cf92 146825
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.jpg
JPEG18.2 4a4cdcb2165e676e686cc0dafa8cec53 56929
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.QC.jpg
13d013adf85ae2d2ce70963ca1e5819e 147858
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.jpg
JPEG19.2 cb0014e0f81c85cf15ff391ec7909525 55460
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.QC.jpg
cf0b6fe46cd0539751107da32e67ed5f 139936
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.jpg
JPEG20.2 97b0931a585dd52dccf9dd4f7292d70b 59710
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.QC.jpg
22a6b5bcdf2e867697839bd52dbdc017 105573
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.jpg
JPEG21.2 ca3295fb39b70e3e78a3619db439a649 45486
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.QC.jpg
223d561035dd7bbd09f51ed51f94981f 126874
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.jpg
JPEG22.2 3e6f6af2a49639d2acb7f1e47d23adba 55637
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.QC.jpg
923c80484001f9dc2a64c924732bea9e 138743
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.jpg
JPEG23.2 fbc7f1a9d614d067aea24660f6bef8e3 58234
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.QC.jpg
a1203c94f25d33f8801a5d021319df34 112295
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.jpg
JPEG24.2 72d20e620a138694afff0cca108a7f56 50084
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.QC.jpg
a6c613d26b4a2f5437cae9d58c57c1e7 110501
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.jpg
JPEG25.2 98403f33eea6d20724d66ae20baffef0 48081
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.QC.jpg
1c381da279ffe2bc164f08e4bca9e2bd 143813
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.jpg
JPEG26.2 b721895fdf0b992908266dcac8142977 60866
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.QC.jpg
598a15155a406566a34e0a3ced030d55 132708
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.jpg
JPEG27.2 23763f3b3b1cb1aee2374585dae570f5 56189
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.QC.jpg
51c58e84eb362f7da8787e7ed751a4eb 128071
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.jpg
JPEG28.2 cbf4c9d027956f8d3ef73500a853db53 54753
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.QC.jpg
9fb11be49bc91f2fc457415aad347831 94966
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.jpg
JPEG29.2 558ffded6ea8c85bbfeafc070990d442 42554
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.QC.jpg
f75a2960136573620deded4f9dae2ffd 113116
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.jpg
JPEG30.2 5039d4f23b70cfe517b4eb95b125d016 48052
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.QC.jpg
9a6ff9c2efc8ca21f77f43fb273c0223 145679
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.jpg
JPEG31.2 f0ab7b3b0301a346645c93af975bf76a 61995
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.QC.jpg
92e74a0c1360902e6b4be920bfe2c06a 132554
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.jpg
JPEG32.2 2eedecd002a74573091372786b9dfd8a 56130
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.QC.jpg
fb6765eda3af26f1d615a5f2b0b010a4 127245
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.jpg
JPEG33.2 1a650349e78d9a3f9e96f0baca5d4f4b 54030
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.QC.jpg
76cc25a285ec19d35e73e7dd8e1fa6ef 130914
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.jpg
JPEG34.2 788dd01276d22a0bd6000070b9a1496c 55930
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.QC.jpg
5f232d72a2bb09f455a3225298c75346 136711
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.jpg
JPEG35.2 6942e9250c47c889f948655f817274cc 58465
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.QC.jpg
b92d5f87a83f5aa84149d95a1ee3b976 129463
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.jpg
JPEG36.2 fca0f9164d62bf627cbeaad6cde219ad 53699
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.QC.jpg
5f7020f8420546818953d26655ea8725 138697
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.jpg
JPEG37.2 5e8c74260e153838990989c2f2c8a84b 59405
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.QC.jpg
4bdaed725c6c975dfa6af7456965be53 122315
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.jpg
JPEG38.2 dd2beb1918bc2a8ac3930b7774aaae23 49805
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.QC.jpg
704780cd8ef4c3dafbcd4ac9a13fdbb1 134282
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.jpg
JPEG39.2 93a170624df93bc8d044a13ffa9e4dd7 57629
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.QC.jpg
f15e5a600e785e520e6c705825da0a31 133123
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.jpg
JPEG40.2 7b803cce0d6b90e27fcd1f1b7f13e59d 56372
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.QC.jpg
c042207c4b693e347362305280b09f07 133783
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.jpg
JPEG41.2 dfeb26f1be402d8dbcd526fceb7c6ad7 58118
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.QC.jpg
73f4c82f3fc2c06a278da1674e4459f9 128796
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.jpg
JPEG42.2 ec8ebf9149be7ac0d808661a3a9eb33b 55612
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.QC.jpg
0d811557ba5007eebba6218d62d62387 131003
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.jpg
JPEG43.2 03e8d8de5c8db578fca9ac67d60b94bf 54438
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.QC.jpg
d67d7def1d3996810da81d6792d9b966 119076
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.jpg
JPEG44.2 c587af8f97742f40a33c42e3a458ee0e 51981
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.QC.jpg
effab9d5cfea48e8f078c7165ef524d0 120908
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.jpg
JPEG45.2 6657e42266a44390ef47375e67a462d3 50953
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.QC.jpg
92162dead3147d88168960eb784feff8 123640
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.jpg
JPEG46.2 7e78b8f32c0d9b936a104a8c93c56d90 49530
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.QC.jpg
cdc34a1446d584f85bba447b3e0fde39 128828
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.jpg
JPEG47.2 5262b1aa0fbfa660bcf18238b6b01064 51771
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.QC.jpg
bc898a51b7321fdd432e7122e83031f5 139113
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.jpg
JPEG48.2 889814b2183cf6b352954644fb8a4197 57435
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.QC.jpg
f6490725949177b9babb9b569bdb1695 125915
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.jpg
JPEG49.2 383d0623c28c2328e6f606e7e00a2714 54127
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.QC.jpg
2e06ceef6c513c415d365732e8666dce 118629
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.jpg
JPEG50.2 b63766519c5b0a2e6facaff3c82625a2 51858
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.QC.jpg
a5301963e6c0cfc7b7883921be758d4c 133436
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.jpg
JPEG51.2 0824875dd89cb837e574897d19ee1a9a 56214
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.QC.jpg
157b0c094d01a807210e5b85300e2525 134958
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.jpg
JPEG52.2 aba82540cfe8bb84dd2c929e69d988c5 57362
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.QC.jpg
dcbb274cf6c1da03c0b9713c19037ce1 135129
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.jpg
JPEG53.2 b74acfad0cbc0e64213c9505a2fb1817 55539
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.QC.jpg
62d37253fce248984507149ee9117601 126115
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.jpg
JPEG54.2 6092463329f09e49bfc80d9707b71e7a 52906
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.QC.jpg
061f8e61d65597d77877d6f384521602 131226
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.jpg
JPEG55.2 50e0da60c8ff7a2db60e12fd83c3faf1 55203
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.QC.jpg
97042f5e690fde955960199103652dd9 130319
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.jpg
JPEG56.2 9a198990fb6005eb030bde2cea9e8d4e 55487
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.QC.jpg
7cbd3faa012f3525f6427e3a2da2152c 141836
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.jpg
JPEG57.2 08249b68237800b4d80b17e2f0ccde5b 57466
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.QC.jpg
a2e83105049fa192d0134c8fd71219ae 130611
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.jpg
JPEG58.2 38b2234c2887ddf65e9efd97198dddd1 55728
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.QC.jpg
669cdc718a90b2ce78384e3182ca6956 135805
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.jpg
JPEG59.2 4138119f953c6318b026e49501801ae2 57060
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.QC.jpg
d28cbccb941b7541a0611a3ec3e135df 115890
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.jpg
JPEG60.2 dded44ad88b85a3e9f03dfacd3aa190a 49944
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.QC.jpg
3d1af08eac50c90f056cefa4f60d3aa4 132841
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.jpg
JPEG61.2 c5b201227d1a681d1143d215ff6d28cf 55507
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.QC.jpg
db19572286ed731495a646d002014436 130318
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.jpg
JPEG62.2 ad17df2b489e5065ad852ac4893cb238 52407
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.QC.jpg
387ffeeba88abd2ea5f78e44f3c6d683 131033
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.jpg
JPEG63.2 4ea320c84a0fd2a6b0f6eb8af28ce9e2 54364
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.QC.jpg
d98bc680d6c1d36ae4a3007da2c3202d 136086
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.jpg
JPEG64.2 460ba9eb26d622dd46ebc97d6f620d3f 53879
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.QC.jpg
ef8bf4b64b97170f1433067d25dffb1e 130821
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.jpg
JPEG65.2 2b8980983b139f9f9790489d7bef8930 54234
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.QC.jpg
8cd5d3932d78a7e33711ce63fbdb88c2 132152
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.jpg
JPEG66.2 913cdab93fad0eec150fc0a18e80ded9 55440
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.QC.jpg
3ee70f360084ceb6d39f26d7edaebdc2 127872
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.jpg
JPEG67.2 90ac625c9aa701ef96b5e5eb6d94922a 54145
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.QC.jpg
06a3a0154992616576c601f21f4f6183 137078
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.jpg
JPEG68.2 a6383463b490bd12a74be13aa67030f8 56559
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.QC.jpg
0cd5403006f906cdeae86eeeb1536bf8 126007
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.jpg
JPEG69.2 145950c5a62e2850d63c7e5fad9bd315 54954
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.QC.jpg
f6a7ed52ef7f3f878e8062cad938bece 122890
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.jpg
JPEG70.2 e9e524be8b158fee91ef2fd3e5e8a569 53391
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.QC.jpg
b0ebedb851315782ce386240e0ba5451 136084
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.jpg
JPEG71.2 c0796b8496d1a66e1279ca7386a069ac 52764
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.QC.jpg
d9fe27d3ba2841cc98dcbee43cdb22ab 137630
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.jpg
JPEG72.2 679c9e7b8a9d8de1d5b5fe6998a08301 58749
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.QC.jpg
771040a9e8bdabcedd023fa95c1507ea 130822
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.jpg
JPEG73.2 4719aae4a21e74518ee9bc7a1742f017 54592
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.QC.jpg
1c794337146cd5d75f37227cca9a9767 131891
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.jpg
JPEG74.2 62154f637bd33d87e3c5e7db2cf8e27e 56489
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.QC.jpg
3694839b476ba70114ef41bdbcf7a008 143861
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.jpg
JPEG75.2 10bdd5312b8f6cf5bb288476e9d62b14 54750
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.QC.jpg
f733d2fe0a12a5e4b519ea1075b33249 122267
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.jpg
JPEG76.2 40365d1788caaea954518f4534f4af39 53494
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.QC.jpg
d1d9fd8574f4875ad09281d3b244b753 134797
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.jpg
JPEG77.2 8650cb446b4c0ec1494e1cf095791c24 55417
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.QC.jpg
ea52ab21c4922b68d6d5a31ce5a045f4 112026
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.jpg
JPEG78.2 4fe7dfab74085972699a1fc93e310143 49370
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.QC.jpg
81959390007d97e07cc20b2c9a86e361 127976
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.jpg
JPEG79.2 aae327003f428c28909f54527018f25d 53920
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.QC.jpg
a5ac89673413ab431e9a9abaee596a68 139131
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.jpg
JPEG80.2 9178c6c5664da8760b3f337810f0572b 59402
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.QC.jpg
508e63bca9cb367c07a9a9f98652155f 135549
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.jpg
JPEG81.2 1fdddc94e44b65fe683cccbaea130978 53514
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.QC.jpg
033998780d3351f75bb2f78807ae2ffa 134498
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.jpg
JPEG82.2 5bc53616f5e2766d1f3fa152f0faeef3 57497
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.QC.jpg
a559d64cd3e2a38fb7ed7ba37a025365 133659
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.jpg
JPEG83.2 7f99bad5b9389eaeb95de1f0443daa7e 51391
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.QC.jpg
67328f08fb16ade99b581d60f8ed0b6b 144804
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.jpg
JPEG84.2 ee2e92c134956fe117adb52e30173c48 61358
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.QC.jpg
c50455d280916c5841b7a0e7188ba8a6 139161
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.jpg
JPEG85.2 5365d7f97e3d1e9ffaffc25e32ed8412 59488
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.QC.jpg
eb5d5753389cf0781b07634d34a41e16 138327
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.jpg
JPEG86.2 102405575a85c63a1f28ac54d6516c0f 58672
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.QC.jpg
80aa2c9d0cd4072e00256e31ae6bc723 129137
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.jpg
JPEG87.2 df386b4bdc8ad61a25e37bef4f47f1a9 54159
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.QC.jpg
9b651b8876543557df908eba6f83b27d 135254
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.jpg
JPEG88.2 12848c4825ad73e26e6593b7987b827d 57473
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.QC.jpg
f76daa1bcb1828de5350d23d69368865 129310
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.jpg
JPEG89.2 af841fff124a61e97db05af66f6af737 54332
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.QC.jpg
b78d4ba4b67468762be897b20d680efe 137488
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.jpg
JPEG90.2 c11fffc795af00c3d208104ab6fda751 57792
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.QC.jpg
7c4592bc6e6d6c8517e466721291e199 126140
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.jpg
JPEG91.2 9882db8ee07a9f70a69cf73a1645afba 51000
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.QC.jpg
f5ac285207c0e65b3d7645fb31adc7b2 141210
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.jpg
JPEG92.2 8e72d2886a4c94b0653b6c4b7a9efc49 59517
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.QC.jpg
c8c6b1cb4862c7a29b1276f4dd0bd793 142520
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.jpg
JPEG93.2 3465aa345c825876a903129a90aaf655 60290
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.QC.jpg
0e83a1e06c893a9bfe11ce3811cda953 121527
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.jpg
JPEG94.2 a41d6986dc09da2bf9b58ce818617945 51459
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.QC.jpg
7e6e75f2069cfceff597a83f445550e2 129498
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.jpg
JPEG95.2 113797c97b00cae5b09b2bf44e077bb2 51906
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.QC.jpg
a19a1fe38e3ae71c6572e7577abbb5c9 128344
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.jpg
JPEG96.2 d3b0ced1b1809f805ec823c0e6460fdf 55368
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.QC.jpg
cefe71a60e389056ef12d0c7d5584919 131923
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.jpg
JPEG97.2 6a8746a9eb92f7c93198953a33692e04
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.QC.jpg
ea283619650688c151b41aaeaab6c7ca 135156
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.jpg
JPEG98.2 64dea942082707136a560fc5df37f852 57632
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.QC.jpg
7a31fc57a25e263ac0d81825888611e9 138346
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.jpg
JPEG99.2 dfb16b969138429649f350afc5aaffd1 56401
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.QC.jpg
5aa2aa33cf5938e5d66ef6391a152606 136834
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.jpg
JPEG100.2 e6aac7615277791a29de484bbd08540b 56726
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.QC.jpg
b9fd0d11193f1f8f50605b98a3b290a5 138627
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.jpg
JPEG101.2 21b64416890e76ec8ac4cb822cfa30d1 57093
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.QC.jpg
8cf930b14a6b4479d37dcb7eb972c0fd 130907
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.jpg
JPEG102.2 c0fae73dafcdec290825a245690369b5 53951
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.QC.jpg
0d2f3339471d0e4d04699d247bdb15af 141808
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.jpg
JPEG103.2 a39ce497d39014c13443f7944f97c7cc 59702
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.QC.jpg
0a271f51aeb64359d6ca36a4b156b088 140808
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.jpg
JPEG104.2 df3129fe93a05bdfdd5a2843014fd04e 59592
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.QC.jpg
ab95534ac29995835f914c5a631fc735 137954
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.jpg
JPEG105.2 a936a1f24975fb87672c4ab8f33856a2 58604
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.QC.jpg
bbdfc013026ee10d81096d83fc0f3424 85596
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.jpg
JPEG106.2 81c7083a0ba28aa948f758d857accef6 38502
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.QC.jpg
63e9ea4021cfbc6914d5a6d6ad312f2e 107387
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.jpg
JPEG107.2 c3836f2a25ecce7630d9fb69ede84510 47792
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.QC.jpg
f3ac7c0005175107ac77eb58a0bbb370 126529
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.jpg
JPEG108.2 34bb488c81ffd735e6ab02c0d75fea2c 53942
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.QC.jpg
d2eba6b6d3722162b5840039d287018e 132876
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.jpg
JPEG109.2 4a2eb17c543c0837e58c1f313a1ab624 57212
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.QC.jpg
8ac59f87bea25167187384c10502c1bc 127201
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.jpg
JPEG110.2 ea82e459ba3c21031e2af67a4a74f959 55012
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.QC.jpg
0cdd36a3ee1bfd482ed5f311c1847e96 134360
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.jpg
JPEG111.2 d753f597e2c14b9c9bce444c281e8200 57757
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.QC.jpg
a7d494bf7bd9f7ec99013d86bbe8ea7b 134275
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.jpg
JPEG112.2 bb9ecc5c7d5a1e17f7d9c38fa116de83 57535
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.QC.jpg
04e92207a1da180136a9e4c19e05ae41 141065
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.jpg
JPEG113.2 47f4bac78ed4743e8baa6465f5814553 59991
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.QC.jpg
0e5ef8e96fb2d65df076e9c87b46172f 122998
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.jpg
JPEG114.2 58045c1e5dbcc9fb7ffb710f1eba8a70 52705
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.QC.jpg
4fe44493668db7b2f80d8971799921d5 124140
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.jpg
JPEG115.2 df55fa9598a80857daa478a099906502 54324
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.QC.jpg
97225d59ee0bbde08a6ca44770bad403 129730
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.jpg
JPEG116.2 5797aa8ff8c5138236d2080747e61bdd 55305
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.QC.jpg
491f698ea9f9653f6e3d17258e64a4c4 73915
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.jpg
JPEG117.2 6b153848d0821ec3023fdc2417fb287a 33781
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.QC.jpg
4a117cfac67b1d2f0427dd188ea8436e 112187
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.jpg
JPEG118.2 0a76f52e417f074e4c8d64c67d38b988 48948
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.QC.jpg
1d1aa7bbc798f31339a7927eb05bc114 93789
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.jpg
JPEG119.2 748e8036f7c9774a4bb532250e4340e9 43285
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.QC.jpg
a29a8659651adc369112f50c2fa2f8be 54231
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.jpg
JPEG120.2 bc6310c0866de197385f7f511d082cdb 28013
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.QC.jpg
e9719d4439a6b0f71cafb77686fdb1a8 138578
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.jpg
JPEG121.2 dd21aacb5d17423faf1b84d09c4187b2 59768
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.QC.jpg
6304d5d3312dba2560c43571af2645dd 131741
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.jpg
JPEG122.2 751e8cd28285d01ce44e258279b22f4a 56698
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.QC.jpg
03bd2670da57da56e2cc1246c6fcdc13 42910
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.jpg
JPEG123.2 8758432aaab7fcc195376e4ee7f67606 23983
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.QC.jpg
318af43b78fc07d48ce3f814204fe1a9 80307
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.jpg
JPEG124.2 632bd00f79a7e79f14ca500f655717bf 37870
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.QC.jpg
359ea31f13eca4688c2c9a3b16fab54e 75332
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.jpg
JPEG125.2 ed7e066afb4e231eb96ce158abb438c2 37279
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.QC.jpg
6f71b1616355504aafe2485f99b377c4 80195
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.jpg
JPEG126.2 9757a14c3f3f5de5bde0dc6deb401e07 38696
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.QC.jpg
c6d2abb1a58753eec47e5195ba164b90 70473
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.jpg
JPEG127.2 d8224c69bf63629ea21dedef2e9a0bcf 34533
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.QC.jpg
5eddb23b750142db58c71aeaa51edc41 134633
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.jpg
JPEG128.2 b530429406847f26a576b9d76fa545b2 56817
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.QC.jpg
80233d7d1456f8481dc06f2da60d4ec3 134562
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.jpg
JPEG129.2 813b51ab5c3c6c1a962ed26d97a4c1be 58458
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.QC.jpg
e916e9977a1738c8a734a0946e841a3d 123918
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.jpg
JPEG130.2 1112a5489d78da8b46dcb0e4d5da2395 52780
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.QC.jpg
f11706f4f4410d339e8a65ef35427b8d 87828
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.jpg
JPEG131.2 645286a3d3b8299d79fd0c69e625612f 40873
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.QC.jpg
b6d95ec43cfe2f9409d902565acb5d07 100568
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.jpg
JPEG132.2 abf0aadafdd2753172097a1cc59a9736 47068
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.QC.jpg
80ca5a32f46bf06fed41e4bc17e3b39d 56864
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.jpg
JPEG133.2 c5a457ffad5310ff1ee1bd01db4b52db 26893
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.QC.jpg
7cfee6cd193e18ccf18302a36d413e6f 40813
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.jpg
JPEG134.2 ddf9d36c15e7eecb18d5d05535fb726c 21842
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.QC.jpg
d5d3e4df150f4e95fd649fbd76e958f2 129224
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.jpg
JPEG135.2 ac8f80f8846a3da28a939c38f840582a 55525
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.QC.jpg
467028d4fb813802aeb5a3801559ecd2 127097
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.jpg
JPEG136.2 785405a6fbc27f1d83255a1b59eb7725 55796
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.QC.jpg
3934105fa030a08e14caa2316dd8e340 126967
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.jpg
JPEG137.2 2cb9cbf4946e81313bc4f1b17325ac2a 55054
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.QC.jpg
3cf018b462b25eb2cf1c7765fcaffed9 85565
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.jpg
JPEG138.2 eaadf590e1141f102f41e3673f65284d 39610
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.QC.jpg
4dd677e77f388a37bf687f5060a875d2 115212
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.jpg
JPEG139.2 78a00f813494cdb409ea6436e066676c 49401
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.QC.jpg
1106c50b66b91359214ff96e344e26fe 124715
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.jpg
JPEG140.2 94f7c22b6ecd1a9c49f7a407f322d1c8 54317
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.QC.jpg
bc56eec27d291d0db1b0281a2098468b 128617
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.jpg
JPEG141.2 0ab2e4098594c26b2cd8f867d8b5d45c 56547
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.QC.jpg
17b6980f071d053a0c86422f3753f4b6 131972
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.jpg
JPEG142.2 561cf34e0a76638474ee9970cf2eefce 57086
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.QC.jpg
ef788cc4d17fb7ac9474c4a6815a7f9d 128352
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.jpg
JPEG143.2 6aecf3b03962cedf24218b52c12d2991 53426
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.QC.jpg
d00ac589607efef2d2d2c96eb24e0881 136568
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.jpg
JPEG144.2 e842c27106f45a3e4a6f355cd566d4ea 57964
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.QC.jpg
261d5a629df754ba12527f7669f9a7b6 128257
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.jpg
JPEG145.2 24b3fabd4108e0ffe5a2c438e2748dc3 56769
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.QC.jpg
1873cbcb04f5e4702151e297d89c0ea7 111911
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.jpg
JPEG146.2 5e577689c8ea24ba4530ffb942bf16c9 49933
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.QC.jpg
9458bd74c83141ef2bdbed59bf14a782 121163
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.jpg
JPEG147.2 e08e47164753cca140b5e00255a387ab 51526
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.QC.jpg
627b37ed2fc8d657ec0b4616bffd239a 123499
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.jpg
JPEG148.2 c33d34a3235207d55b3527f9f97529d3 52775
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.QC.jpg
55c9c36e18a29f48859bf141a72261fb 126261
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.jpg
JPEG149.2 2095fe748254853c1d40aca21d2503bf 52894
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.QC.jpg
3701c6278556fb3bdf8fc29897a277f5 130151
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.jpg
JPEG150.2 3312999dbd9f39c0d7b179b746d78802 55899
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.QC.jpg
0873c4632ef32c484b12ceaa096fb51c 47405
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.jpg
JPEG151.2 fa03843a5ae800fe65fb763865fb3242 25169
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.QC.jpg
0f973fbcbe1d8443dd24ccda0171a50d 158595
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.jpg
JPEG152.2 7bb03670ed8d9e27ad0f29ee44974b0f 54887
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.QC.jpg
6129370a26928d199b9a6d350fda29c0 137023
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.jpg
JPEG153.2 5ac4dd92eb7ab4974c1ed307e4fe7aac 52355
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.QC.jpg
f84847f0b0332f0e2e16b2431f17fa12 114771
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.jpg
JPEG154.2 cc045e8d73c61a82542d00dd08a590b7 47558
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.QC.jpg
640548ebd2c2a5227b95632a66250ad1 58296
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.jpg
JPEG155.2 4eeae39f07c6dfbea4156b11b9c571c9 27719
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.QC.jpg
1753bc5acd9d8176a90c0f2038d695c6 109373
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.jpg
JPEG156.2 178265e2ed1a68fcb1939d3ba6a9dc6a 47105
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.QC.jpg
111b1b71abb9b056454c8e1bfbba50c3 121095
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.jpg
JPEG157.2 2f602d5bc0a58e60b7a9bf39114b547b 53338
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.QC.jpg
4ee8f29baf963aa13d7555f2225dafea 27056
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.jpg
JPEG158.2 76e72118667a02b278aa70d1b32cf984 16638
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.QC.jpg
26c4d32fb0c4a210125ffe8b316cc0c4 107003
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.jpg
JPEG159.2 dc86bdba4bab7203bc68b6894acfde04 47042
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.QC.jpg
18b3c2c5377f832f14c6e2e431664aca 127726
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.jpg
JPEG160.2 30caca9bf0233e5c46849e07ba40d643 55406
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.QC.jpg
0eabc3f74a5c97ced2e3e98a55066994 123253
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.jpg
JPEG161.2 dabfd504988bd9ad34fe8db3f827eaa4 54412
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.QC.jpg
2194b53e4b137ae989aaf8550a8bf9ca 118267
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.jpg
JPEG162.2 41b0b3d9670150f93b44f03c08e09e01 50935
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.QC.jpg
ce2e7ce6421569d0393a4a3144268554 121869
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.jpg
JPEG163.2 aa18125283f06f9dd1d46f5999faa67f 52463
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.QC.jpg
a1cb6cad40e64585e9d9cee1082f69d0 140159
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.jpg
JPEG164.2 aa0ffa27d9ad2b5d3b401065cd226c80 50538
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.QC.jpg
49d8725e5a777880459c8582d9a3e32b 155724
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.jpg
JPEG165.2 80fe98a6135e1b9add7045d58031deef 57171
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.QC.jpg
dae5f815127e9e0e49c31ba0e0d5efa3 149708
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.jpg
JPEG166.2 37b5373aea4791f0acc4e81d7cc9e86e 54599
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.QC.jpg
24730524547ceb1639dd2ba5fbdc81a1 155853
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.jpg
JPEG167.2 3aad82adc0e116111748b104d6939e69 55482
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.QC.jpg
c66e5dd1e130f9ee1149e136f9a0136e 154852
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.jpg
JPEG168.2 28e9db7ff1c199f41f49870a079f635b 55247
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.QC.jpg
ff71b2ce367a9c136ca1d34b64a49845 84252
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.jpg
JPEG169.2 0e4b14312529f08716079cd7f8d0d94f 34776
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.QC.jpg
a8b7229c8cb02de08ec8edf5e8326ecb 116332
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.jpg
JPEG170.2 05afb834804fe78f8ecaa9e397242938 50747
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.QC.jpg
8e70f589fe16294f158da5dc78de5a7a 33807
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.jpg
JPEG171.2 9d5d2b24fb6271ffa9bd3c946528fd8c 19908
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.QC.jpg
de7baf9ba9bc194b53fbfc4bd477fa5b 115488
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.jpg
JPEG172.2 cf7b561b128afc614650fd24f09611ee 44326
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.QC.jpg
THUMB1 imagejpeg-thumbnails 31e7990df00850af5b3519c1febbe202 15221
needsassessmentf00grim_0000thm.jpg
THUMB2 c336d17d815dae32f5c084dbfd04d49b 12591
needsassessmentf00grim_0001thm.jpg
THUMB3 245e885c0fa1d1d27b6a6e990be8c6de 12973
needsassessmentf00grim_0002thm.jpg
THUMB4 ac83b5274c957b97b70cf077c58f7363 23678
needsassessmentf00grim_0003thm.jpg
THUMB5 6ddb433eb135c5a0797adcead9bc1649 13898
needsassessmentf00grim_0004thm.jpg
THUMB6 8319a284bcfb9113273772d2f56085ea 21815
needsassessmentf00grim_0005thm.jpg
THUMB7 d9b5a6d96da83fc8b0eb046336ce2347 17452
needsassessmentf00grim_0006thm.jpg
THUMB8 e889adc5194dc8195c0ef28681533a89 23769
needsassessmentf00grim_0007thm.jpg
THUMB9 4bef31ef277ee27efa09ab3e9726f8cf 25515
needsassessmentf00grim_0008thm.jpg
THUMB10 a66662c0ac1f19f131d705af82106a58 24199
needsassessmentf00grim_0009thm.jpg
THUMB11 0f81286044a3292ba676cc052e9b9ea3 25207
needsassessmentf00grim_0010thm.jpg
THUMB12 8b059c3bf446dad228cc8d221e14ac63 24274
needsassessmentf00grim_0011thm.jpg
THUMB13 683b6d0245e18cfa61f6d3da99bf7155 25599
needsassessmentf00grim_0012thm.jpg
THUMB14 10ebd8a89616565fc5cadc04976c8f0b 25210
needsassessmentf00grim_0013thm.jpg
THUMB15 822d84198b5a4715d9a95adbffd802e6 24708
needsassessmentf00grim_0014thm.jpg
THUMB16 be4351494c4881bd421e5fb91a5a2538 25591
needsassessmentf00grim_0015thm.jpg
THUMB17 3de36c628d5f5037ae2b21fc11c7de9a 25625
needsassessmentf00grim_0016thm.jpg
THUMB18 52a931272fbc0b30ec4ae28d35d58e1b 25520
needsassessmentf00grim_0017thm.jpg
THUMB19 a6db61776ed8bf4689750977fe02efb4 25006
needsassessmentf00grim_0018thm.jpg
THUMB20 b638d04e44addaa18c40607169503b7f 26279
needsassessmentf00grim_0019thm.jpg
THUMB21 c5777ab95e141438d30d374cc344be9c 23152
needsassessmentf00grim_0020thm.jpg
THUMB22 b3b42781db83593d5d1b50401bb53fa2 25078
needsassessmentf00grim_0021thm.jpg
THUMB23 ee14c57bf65f0e428f1b132f93749a55 25601
needsassessmentf00grim_0022thm.jpg
THUMB24 bfe04f794d1f06f36f504fde81c895a2 23510
needsassessmentf00grim_0023thm.jpg
THUMB25 e98579d0a63b597990165745a6bb4f9f 23581
needsassessmentf00grim_0024thm.jpg
THUMB26 3fdcd2a56299601f6ac899e73018b1c0 26670
needsassessmentf00grim_0025thm.jpg
THUMB27 e4e90a3b6965f22b65d68c6024638a3c 24918
needsassessmentf00grim_0026thm.jpg
THUMB28 ca8dd2791d989ab3fa7777474920fc05 24549
needsassessmentf00grim_0027thm.jpg
THUMB29 69e1c40ee83a831b2afba169b00e12a7 21212
needsassessmentf00grim_0028thm.jpg
THUMB30 dbe16a0ed6f67275acc275efcc0e2a5b 22298
needsassessmentf00grim_0029thm.jpg
THUMB31 40f9b416520cfbac3c247c0e1e512784 27082
needsassessmentf00grim_0030thm.jpg
THUMB32 b1548578a1151eb7280272c5ba2f0d9e
needsassessmentf00grim_0031thm.jpg
THUMB33 1b11a6932552fc13c185f833ab830f92 24984
needsassessmentf00grim_0032thm.jpg
THUMB34 c0d40ec4cf9f584d92aa1ad69d728933 25209
needsassessmentf00grim_0033thm.jpg
THUMB35 be591a43f3b6dedbaabcf4503fca4069 26151
needsassessmentf00grim_0034thm.jpg
THUMB36 35266654f264a2f74a07ffe26ea927f6 24354
needsassessmentf00grim_0035thm.jpg
THUMB37 7ad472c3f8a1421e33dfcc50269da24a 26247
needsassessmentf00grim_0036thm.jpg
THUMB38 67b1905f9700f95474dc7e6ed98612f8 23079
needsassessmentf00grim_0037thm.jpg
THUMB39 8fd90d237be23c0de89a644af4624021 25945
needsassessmentf00grim_0038thm.jpg
THUMB40 ef63de46f83f103d82a3031426700504 25165
needsassessmentf00grim_0039thm.jpg
THUMB41 c88f22312745c95e6bd5e7ca4eaf74da 26278
needsassessmentf00grim_0040thm.jpg
THUMB42 9b73ac8069a4ab9deed89b6cc5cb249e 25512
needsassessmentf00grim_0041thm.jpg
THUMB43 8b5cf48307ab3c2c2e140bf05b37a25c 24286
needsassessmentf00grim_0042thm.jpg
THUMB44 49cb39eb8ab2944ae25a163f1f6c47ce 24444
needsassessmentf00grim_0043thm.jpg
THUMB45 4f9c6589a90ed52fcff5d608193b5286 23767
needsassessmentf00grim_0044thm.jpg
THUMB46 7ad12ea50519f68194c9e681f0b01266 22981
needsassessmentf00grim_0045thm.jpg
THUMB47 5780003afa7487a7221de53a1f39aca6 23784
needsassessmentf00grim_0046thm.jpg
THUMB48 812141707a6e54d79e80c909e866beaa 25872
needsassessmentf00grim_0047thm.jpg
THUMB49 9b869ddd8b2ef7fb245b1acc9af1d8a9 24863
needsassessmentf00grim_0048thm.jpg
THUMB50 6aeece4a2da1a17dcde4dd1f244f898e 23744
needsassessmentf00grim_0049thm.jpg
THUMB51 458188d7c6a0957e5b5489fb0d885286 24885
needsassessmentf00grim_0050thm.jpg
THUMB52 f6cd1421b0adba8581f311e2292962c0 25932
needsassessmentf00grim_0051thm.jpg
THUMB53 6570abb1d42900171ea735ec7cb0ef34 25336
needsassessmentf00grim_0052thm.jpg
THUMB54 a3bfd39621dfcec4b72fc74255d54a8c 24303
needsassessmentf00grim_0053thm.jpg
THUMB55 05e135e9e96ef0edb90c6fc6c86c58a4 24490
needsassessmentf00grim_0054thm.jpg
THUMB56 20de6a6267bea2978197d551195e227c 25490
needsassessmentf00grim_0055thm.jpg
THUMB57 a7ab289ccfefe5255a9dce4d4ae698c8 25680
needsassessmentf00grim_0056thm.jpg
THUMB58 83a14f18311cf8067eac58357cefaaca 24852
needsassessmentf00grim_0057thm.jpg
THUMB59 41491a4f64bf663d9ba8207949e5b61d 24656
needsassessmentf00grim_0058thm.jpg
THUMB60 64db707a329fcc2720f281d353b52238 23838
needsassessmentf00grim_0059thm.jpg
THUMB61 80d937473e378b2fbff14ab6c4e1871c 24801
needsassessmentf00grim_0060thm.jpg
THUMB62 db57f80ec37400ebd313e3b55502849a 23819
needsassessmentf00grim_0061thm.jpg
THUMB63 c182d38d73a69ec6b17fe04c3ff92da9 24979
needsassessmentf00grim_0062thm.jpg
THUMB64 9b38d99449acf2bd733210a83f4162a6 24730
needsassessmentf00grim_0063thm.jpg
THUMB65 7daff52bb33345daf7732874ca501128 24595
needsassessmentf00grim_0064thm.jpg
THUMB66 eecc522e9af53a3fc3fca7f52b4d2a27 25135
needsassessmentf00grim_0065thm.jpg
THUMB67 d79a9f8d4e159730ef24009986eff7d4 24387
needsassessmentf00grim_0066thm.jpg
THUMB68 763fd45cb4aa4ddedcd69688dbb6766d 25384
needsassessmentf00grim_0067thm.jpg
THUMB69 43f8d7aac47dd2f3133f15b905f64361 24948
needsassessmentf00grim_0068thm.jpg
THUMB70 702a5de3cad492e94a86bbb8ffee22fa 24266
needsassessmentf00grim_0069thm.jpg
THUMB71 747700be3c7973472eb46b4b3a6d1310 23796
needsassessmentf00grim_0070thm.jpg
THUMB72 8719b34f44abb58474d280619e82b24a 26008
needsassessmentf00grim_0071thm.jpg
THUMB73 61d9bb23d8be4108e0e3abcf575818f0 24632
needsassessmentf00grim_0072thm.jpg
THUMB74 0ac269c5aa5b5a83e1d0f20837b518a2 25266
needsassessmentf00grim_0073thm.jpg
THUMB75 5655f7aa4daf80bbd15d69f05107aa5f 24937
needsassessmentf00grim_0074thm.jpg
THUMB76 99e543adb3e5df5f84a9918a1a058922 24468
needsassessmentf00grim_0075thm.jpg
THUMB77 95f4ebb6366da1be3ac1ffaba21008e9 25172
needsassessmentf00grim_0076thm.jpg
THUMB78 ed7585bdf534342800b8ef2dbd70fbd9 23095
needsassessmentf00grim_0077thm.jpg
THUMB79 14654d9494313bc822d451dde6f0ffae 24455
needsassessmentf00grim_0078thm.jpg
THUMB80 d26830b2117d9db3bc25ae2f29b1bc31 26026
needsassessmentf00grim_0079thm.jpg
THUMB81 4b3dc76e295ee344961a9bb10dcc345f 24679
needsassessmentf00grim_0080thm.jpg
THUMB82 d373a4faba519501da3e586b1608a3bf 25959
needsassessmentf00grim_0081thm.jpg
THUMB83 d2e5e9d00dfe24fa8ba9ca1e229b74eb 23512
needsassessmentf00grim_0082thm.jpg
THUMB84 368b53ea5acb37a243942d4ff0fba1c1 26514
needsassessmentf00grim_0083thm.jpg
THUMB85 1b507f86f0faaf7f8c8e1426fd207475 26535
needsassessmentf00grim_0084thm.jpg
THUMB86 0b4093b2e037cdaa1afbc7f5d39a7619
needsassessmentf00grim_0085thm.jpg
THUMB87 d69d0776193974be374ca067a101d0bf 24637
needsassessmentf00grim_0086thm.jpg
THUMB88 249c74a8f87b621c90f9c24bf52f44ef 25661
needsassessmentf00grim_0087thm.jpg
THUMB89 bf124749000572c143b916b4bfbd6f84 24594
needsassessmentf00grim_0088thm.jpg
THUMB90 852f6853e1ec7eea175f7bafb2eca363
needsassessmentf00grim_0089thm.jpg
THUMB91 20b0df194a788b0f13080a444067fd01 23604
needsassessmentf00grim_0090thm.jpg
THUMB92 464561902f46dbf560477c7bba2b1336 25649
needsassessmentf00grim_0091thm.jpg
THUMB93 c63652230bcfa980df36823d461fe0ac 26136
needsassessmentf00grim_0092thm.jpg
THUMB94 e79a197ec7e78ba79c7db2a7b61ef76a 24118
needsassessmentf00grim_0093thm.jpg
THUMB95 46a40a1f7a771d7076aaa80c1d886886 24491
needsassessmentf00grim_0094thm.jpg
THUMB96 688f6d9bcb1d8679bb5227f5c85da2f5 24784
needsassessmentf00grim_0095thm.jpg
THUMB97 ddecddbd45ea2fb63add70923067391b 25739
needsassessmentf00grim_0096thm.jpg
THUMB98 e68f05374243a400dbfa31f467b7ded6 25381
needsassessmentf00grim_0097thm.jpg
THUMB99 bbd21fd6dac854eff96d9b82d20ab65d 25103
needsassessmentf00grim_0098thm.jpg
THUMB100 0f8b3a62b1baebc78d50a4271ea0289c 24916
needsassessmentf00grim_0099thm.jpg
THUMB101 87909d27df5d36bf62c6e6bacf8544ce 25423
needsassessmentf00grim_0100thm.jpg
THUMB102 f659ab6feda0307f6f0335aa978e3669
needsassessmentf00grim_0101thm.jpg
THUMB103 42ba428e2ad0b1bc53c6b99fb4818aff 25927
needsassessmentf00grim_0102thm.jpg
THUMB104 6b5030c8b05428426212ab46df123531 25502
needsassessmentf00grim_0103thm.jpg
THUMB105 f799f369a0e6dee2dca7163c538edeaf 25787
needsassessmentf00grim_0104thm.jpg
THUMB106 d8e06d5a4a86cd0861f36965d6d661cb 19798
needsassessmentf00grim_0105thm.jpg
THUMB107 723b0951ca12a8c684c1eb44426623ef 22822
needsassessmentf00grim_0106thm.jpg
THUMB108 3d80f281e6c9435e52a8084e2a642cfb 24862
needsassessmentf00grim_0107thm.jpg
THUMB109 e893919f57151cc5db09941df7ecff77 25588
needsassessmentf00grim_0108thm.jpg
THUMB110 5458021b8f6ba7d3b26d40637ec5d506 25225
needsassessmentf00grim_0109thm.jpg
THUMB111 39ff7e9d145f6405f85abdaff8586108 25500
needsassessmentf00grim_0110thm.jpg
THUMB112 d8de4a2242c5d94bdb090084a22de984 25421
needsassessmentf00grim_0111thm.jpg
THUMB113 fdda50f7ab4dbabc69291ba6a69cf6ab 25971
needsassessmentf00grim_0112thm.jpg
THUMB114 ff7821d2350901a9878eb9aa04e3cd53 24667
needsassessmentf00grim_0113thm.jpg
THUMB115 5c1670b22ae0cabc275951a5850c357b 24963
needsassessmentf00grim_0114thm.jpg
THUMB116 a068356f33119f72bc450e750de3fedc 25367
needsassessmentf00grim_0115thm.jpg
THUMB117 cfd8f41b69f668b0518088779abeb61c 18684
needsassessmentf00grim_0116thm.jpg
THUMB118 011c45ca284460b9557f5014f5abda39 23457
needsassessmentf00grim_0117thm.jpg
THUMB119 6e03b3a038c0d63e19a9d0a38d4ef155 22633
needsassessmentf00grim_0118thm.jpg
THUMB120 fe52b446a7659d1691d2b5b1a9034add 16929
needsassessmentf00grim_0119thm.jpg
THUMB121 f35db3fca17c2930a4befbc073aa38c9 26188
needsassessmentf00grim_0120thm.jpg
THUMB122 e560c0fb55eb243f506943b4a932c9f2 25834
needsassessmentf00grim_0121thm.jpg
THUMB123 c79db0e8052f566387442aa51b4a9af7 15807
needsassessmentf00grim_0122thm.jpg
THUMB124 970151828edb96717c9fe9d8b4756496 21022
needsassessmentf00grim_0123thm.jpg
THUMB125 8da07ecd43b545751f476023f5810311 20132
needsassessmentf00grim_0124thm.jpg
THUMB126 6007da3282ed802c6636dd7327093c3a 20874
needsassessmentf00grim_0125thm.jpg
THUMB127 b9b8c23e3e399f3497330b0d255c69be 19455
needsassessmentf00grim_0126thm.jpg
THUMB128 a53831e752774f6593fa75275ee0cd69 25760
needsassessmentf00grim_0127thm.jpg
THUMB129 794c1e5a237fe8f32faf2be117bcd109 25488
needsassessmentf00grim_0128thm.jpg
THUMB130 25ce89257f6396b1ef474535dd5fe282 24338
needsassessmentf00grim_0129thm.jpg
THUMB131 7ddcf514f4839a59d1dc665791b06289 22117
needsassessmentf00grim_0130thm.jpg
THUMB132 ccda617e4ca75042b1ac5af9fe5e8508 23359
needsassessmentf00grim_0131thm.jpg
THUMB133 bb20ef539628828de990dadb92b057b5 17355
needsassessmentf00grim_0132thm.jpg
THUMB134 59b0da43d1e0d8b54990383cf9eda81a 15163
needsassessmentf00grim_0133thm.jpg
THUMB135 b8c72f122e1b21fa6dc187973a77e3b9 25541
needsassessmentf00grim_0134thm.jpg
THUMB136 42009c39d204d8cec13196f1f8f1e701 25020
needsassessmentf00grim_0135thm.jpg
THUMB137 8a659f5c72a1cad2d9acdfed6cf2c0fd 25052
needsassessmentf00grim_0136thm.jpg
THUMB138 d95dd4dac35964a3a490f52dd3c366d2 20357
needsassessmentf00grim_0137thm.jpg
THUMB139 5cac58500dd3daac6c87f329480948d3 23553
needsassessmentf00grim_0138thm.jpg
THUMB140 6981ad08b4a5609c32a373e418163943 24629
needsassessmentf00grim_0139thm.jpg
THUMB141 9b311974f6954bd45e1cd908234d637e 25035
needsassessmentf00grim_0140thm.jpg
THUMB142 170886ac37694ec15379fcf5685469c3 25239
needsassessmentf00grim_0141thm.jpg
THUMB143 6a062ee1ed8764f8a815f131f1d0a3c4 24390
needsassessmentf00grim_0142thm.jpg
THUMB144 fa4737f4041a96a716f427c22196474f 25507
needsassessmentf00grim_0143thm.jpg
THUMB145 fb73ca261425dbc7ca849a08d8597b10 25392
needsassessmentf00grim_0144thm.jpg
THUMB146 eda39c80ba901b77d8168898e1991015 24029
needsassessmentf00grim_0145thm.jpg
THUMB147 84e6768739da30db0842ec37faae988e 23912
needsassessmentf00grim_0146thm.jpg
THUMB148 17620968757570c7604b1fbfa136325b 24204
needsassessmentf00grim_0147thm.jpg
THUMB149 b2e9e68cf824ce36e9ce8772a4d81f14 24205
needsassessmentf00grim_0148thm.jpg
THUMB150 2186e7535d849b5ef487a4ed9df8c54e 25544
needsassessmentf00grim_0149thm.jpg
THUMB151 1fa5783e745fe3ba05207fd8822a2bb6 15761
needsassessmentf00grim_0150thm.jpg
THUMB152 2190893ebbea84d0cef5048cc2c5b4cc 24517
needsassessmentf00grim_0151thm.jpg
THUMB153 c90b0d0c1c79bcccda73a56684e426a4 24555
needsassessmentf00grim_0152thm.jpg
THUMB154 8e54c8977a877b813b2177850f804e83 24054
needsassessmentf00grim_0153thm.jpg
THUMB155 3ce5bc912a2f08b6e7e54b87774bc76d 16793
needsassessmentf00grim_0154thm.jpg
THUMB156 879e6c780b90dd4f8a2b183ee95eaba4 22702
needsassessmentf00grim_0155thm.jpg
THUMB157 f14b28122cd095a2c6a2ca47e4fb27a5 23832
needsassessmentf00grim_0156thm.jpg
THUMB158 e7f5db73039c22afb97f579962914006 13383
needsassessmentf00grim_0157thm.jpg
THUMB159 c14aa75a0294ffcdec5ab03f1ad721e1 23028
needsassessmentf00grim_0158thm.jpg
THUMB160 02bd779fec19165a26dc61eab3398e53 24851
needsassessmentf00grim_0159thm.jpg
THUMB161 73d6c77064c5efd3b28bb47924c6efc4 24480
needsassessmentf00grim_0160thm.jpg
THUMB162 b7f27b62b51752f6659cfbebf12c8b9e 23714
needsassessmentf00grim_0161thm.jpg
THUMB163 6a2d60630e3699f336706fcf8cdba7ce
needsassessmentf00grim_0162thm.jpg
THUMB164 ce3bcc8f5435f7fda73f30a3255dfb30 23164
needsassessmentf00grim_0163thm.jpg
THUMB165 7ef8850cf9f2fceb737af99a7e684dfe 24755
needsassessmentf00grim_0164thm.jpg
THUMB166 a750d10c304d8c90bb8c7b100ced499d 24170
needsassessmentf00grim_0165thm.jpg
THUMB167 7927fa5fbb18ce2151277457940d0ab3 24243
needsassessmentf00grim_0166thm.jpg
THUMB168 9d66ca1e7d6da665dad81edf08b90177 24249
needsassessmentf00grim_0167thm.jpg
THUMB169 95bdadcc4a634f6b0143e7d8d3e2b1d1 19097
needsassessmentf00grim_0168thm.jpg
THUMB170 538d499997d9a754487f6500b1caee52 24158
needsassessmentf00grim_0169thm.jpg
THUMB171 675cc64e07fcda167dbbd8b48b5638e4 14273
needsassessmentf00grim_0170thm.jpg
THUMB172 7dc0acce27a26906dc8354483e3001d2 21447
needsassessmentf00grim_0171thm.jpg
TXT1 textplain 23ca7b6f56de2bc3f5c960aa962dac20 453
needsassessmentf00grim_0000.txt
TXT2 9b2107f2e200cea37dd133d992008702 103
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.txt
TXT3 e625e6f880198558c7095dab16858425 119
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.txt
TXT4 19ed0823bf4f16c99917b6a6e73b2014 1193
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.txt
TXT5 6d52f69e66d00316f67f7bf4cf0d9f9e 149
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.txt
TXT6 66bf44201b54b92fbfd9591e5a578a9e 1551
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.txt
TXT7 c1382600cfbd32bf5db170fcfbcbf01e 704
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.txt
TXT8 96037d81d6dc858ac2dfe12b56847a92 1466
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.txt
TXT9 dbfb2d92b1fd79b37076c713b628ba3e 1440
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.txt
TXT10 7c3e473cbea7100201ac20749f465e67 1329
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.txt
TXT11 42e6d2cb371861a5c813938df146ab8e 1393
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.txt
TXT12 0cb860d4082ca45fe8f0eeaedc757a54 1834
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.txt
TXT13 d00820db8e7c94ccd0daaa6533864fa9 1376
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.txt
TXT14 cb4920c3592cd2266aebe546076355e9 1805
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.txt
TXT15 6215e5a4566fab71a043f1762872bfff 1401
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.txt
TXT16 edc258921cb94a8519cd7335f3bbc5bc 1436
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.txt
TXT17 5157ca1b0191a456d98cd444cd3c82b6 1582
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.txt
TXT18 fd250392ed0e2ed7724e52caab7f5544 1690
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.txt
TXT19 172f74c1c6a9d96f5c7bc39a54beba5e 1845
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.txt
TXT20 2ae2a05db1cfc8ddc6b9423183e8fa10 1501
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.txt
TXT21 07680597170bf23165cdda26d57e5433 1120
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.txt
TXT22 79b747c4241fb7b3804086f63caac452 1355
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.txt
TXT23 5ebd25263f14526f039b1de97c1bf9c4 1465
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.txt
TXT24 9206406033fb2e0404c1daf4d15fde9a 1179
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.txt
TXT25 855de8e7163f988a07ba3903e1c0fae3 1245
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.txt
TXT26 2cfd096c2fd9ea5c0b12d90da0eb44dc 1506
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.txt
TXT27 f7b98a5d33fe07ea4b9afa8a5c232df8 1461
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.txt
TXT28 6f4907463a2378af3880ec776a2d5dee
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.txt
TXT29 48b75247648ebf1ea9571732deca5680 942
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.txt
TXT30 4f0ac5db29cf4812cdaf5a43769bc8a2
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.txt
TXT31 08b8ac5b3e0df8ce91d4d6ab4ae660c5 1573
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.txt
TXT32 95acf6f8dcaa00e145fa6e03f6060f52 1459
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.txt
TXT33 ba9d60616847ade7be61f2ddea182145 1337
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.txt
TXT34 e0649e0300c991fa5dc921b8e4d81ce4 1429
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.txt
TXT35 9966a5114e0eec19a4f6a985e1e444a9 1478
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.txt
TXT36 298f15fcc41d8c6d441df52cd8236582 1470
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.txt
TXT37 ce4c55ff807af4e0ac55d96487f6c042
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.txt
TXT38 490d4e9f9447b9c4a4989fc6c7680858 1346
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.txt
TXT39 3e590caf8554f197b91fdfc1f0ae4924 1422
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.txt
TXT40 18a54816de49b25c093ee44c03e7dfc7 1455
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.txt
TXT41 1ddfcc5cc2ca165bcfef778f71e9049b 1415
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.txt
TXT42 1e3b9fbc54fa78f9c7b613e267048160 1377
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.txt
TXT43 4fd3c6372a5140ace44c43b766358049
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.txt
TXT44 be18237bd0d3fc80e3c449e35db2f8cc 1250
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.txt
TXT45 1e4a81e65177f47f03d3abce3d29297c 1372
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.txt
TXT46 d363bf0e6a0092ae5dfc7a87c772e61c 1520
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.txt
TXT47 fdeea65e69f431ba6aac73cd258a351a 1537
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.txt
TXT48 dbea796cd5bad017a1439f3d913ef21b 1526
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.txt
TXT49 7a0884234fa2eceab5154b7758e560ed 1357
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.txt
TXT50 b6bdb5ef18570ea180171ed433c9523a 1342
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.txt
TXT51 e58e2470f365d3176fab48b55149cdca 1457
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.txt
TXT52 6c5d0ae73c11816f2bf39b7aebfeb132 1453
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.txt
TXT53 a063c7c6a4f7dde2e7160dc51bc9dfd0 1493
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.txt
TXT54 7932db5b1b09787c99966ff0dcbcf276 1380
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.txt
TXT55 29ad2567c54cd45351be5ed57782b52e 1464
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.txt
TXT56 19143fee4bb1e136db8e843afd548000
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.txt
TXT57 bc1bb6d134c77b7db7235e2e276b9fec 1621
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.txt
TXT58 64ae489776df510c57cc472fdd2a2e55 1391
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.txt
TXT59 143dcef8a7d0d196ce1cfb41e2982354
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.txt
TXT60 6e58a734de0b7f21af554e4f2cd9de88 1251
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.txt
TXT61 abb2c53a0be1ec7e53f7b64b6977820a 1502
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.txt
TXT62 e993e7a2589b91354d637bf8baff5d33 1458
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.txt
TXT63 7f3a4c430222d5c836a8fae6b02de6cf 1451
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.txt
TXT64 3884f97d0976071f4525aeae2ccdf93d 1511
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.txt
TXT65 92704ecbcebc46cd18fa551b9c811b7f 1468
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.txt
TXT66 716d39ebfedf9c9a4e0958e64949bd98
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.txt
TXT67 3f1fee33585064ab1c387966bfe466df 1420
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.txt
TXT68 5c31ebfa0c613a9bac0e0c3af50d0064 1534
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.txt
TXT69 840a5989dfdb7d6192615cf760d4e26a 1349
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.txt
TXT70 939bfdf38eadbd4aad52201f65e6a1dc 1306
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.txt
TXT71 cd80af046f49bf7ac8350c9ab676cacb 1657
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.txt
TXT72 341e266d7938a63efcf28f8330fbc5a8 1474
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.txt
TXT73 fbae64acc5ceb687ca93ce8e32cab644 1423
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.txt
TXT74 7dd240fe5b0316f77b784344bba57ce1 1414
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.txt
TXT75 af3946d79c6815552781d520fa492abb 1726
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.txt
TXT76 10a7b542f94a309a473fcc40fd042725 1364
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.txt
TXT77 a42b52491d5915cda99bb97a89c96168 1515
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.txt
TXT78 31f7067d7e96c4e81e8140fccdac0252 1163
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.txt
TXT79 c6983e7a9b134cee9827cf8f74a372aa
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.txt
TXT80 6510a06f0e35ff5244481e2b63c68a79 1494
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.txt
TXT81 bc797a9cbe28edc61ef53943cad085b5 1556
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.txt
TXT82 701a31c76188bf98fd107d66d0ecaa73 1448
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.txt
TXT83 eb961d73740fc666e379ee3438b77e56 1558
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.txt
TXT84 31196e1a2d988660d7010d0fabaef1f9 1488
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.txt
TXT85 9258dd709cae6f3425320222d1befa59
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.txt
TXT86 24c0b439f7127303a894a2a31138d9e0
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.txt
TXT87 4fcaf94aa2f88c33fbe7a739319c79e7
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.txt
TXT88 03583705dac29cd81db098d8fa916f3d
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.txt
TXT89 600fd789c8d47b27d79668a68bafc9fe 1359
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.txt
TXT90 4fa9619b877d395605b7bb4a70edcdd9 1467
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.txt
TXT91 c0f28c0a0c4e357cca5c0a97520c9f99 1374
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.txt
TXT92 7fd1ea8cdafe9858704239619127d083 1483
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.txt
TXT93 0f7ff5bf132637c8fc2a9a65a518fb0f 1505
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.txt
TXT94 0bbd0b3e7b4f001fefe9740b5c5a685f 1323
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.txt
TXT95 0c85f9ef2295f98a7b3ffea029a49f91 1463
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.txt
TXT96 70454d78a00d38ff901c1efd828631c6 1412
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.txt
TXT97 1b7d4e5ac8ca03866f96d8f3feca822d 1396
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.txt
TXT98 e09ebbf420cbb351823a08175c6f9131 1428
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.txt
TXT99 a4f91705c6156eac95645e3c0934ad70 1543
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.txt
TXT100 195868510e3c10484ee94fefdd937e6e 1445
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.txt
TXT101 80d36bd050abbfe20bad32e653dd5636 1567
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.txt
TXT102 e96f33552decdb40cf3e3f2c323a4edb
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.txt
TXT103 b004934be3aaf9ad38288333a8eec650 1500
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.txt
TXT104 750d67ef83a418c735ba2b6e28ccf3ea 1496
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.txt
TXT105 3a339d240353bf2d373a8c375a979724 1437
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.txt
TXT106 0ce7a65f9bfc9b05c68da719115f65e6 816
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.txt
TXT107 9420f062f17a8b709b72b1d01916d0b4 1169
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.txt
TXT108 b88fe8ca10fd325db6e6492ee89498a0 1344
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.txt
TXT109 2518fc6dbb8dcab8b8fb29e9752eef7e 1400
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.txt
TXT110 7785af31126020bfc2e1d18a0643e9d0 1331
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.txt
TXT111 ccdbad37bc9bd3a59707e1581dd888fe 1426
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.txt
TXT112 689878acabe0c27820c5267e1f790cc9 1427
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.txt
TXT113 012773fd3471513e72923facc828194b
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.txt
TXT114 b02aca4c018bbe880920909131081e5e 1322
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.txt
TXT115 08065d1bf5ee843b99731ab1b4c74244 1326
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.txt
TXT116 56e1d772342c054a6f0f4cc4126c82ed 1387
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.txt
TXT117 6792343ba697ecb60bf4bf9aa17bd855 681
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.txt
TXT118 15ee71cc6c3e59b64bf0724140a0ef76 1236
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.txt
TXT119 b2fdd8550812b35a673f36da8c43a24b 811
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.txt
TXT120 0208e32c30dd58122d72dcf85303a9a8 393
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.txt
TXT121 1d06a1cc3bad03a40bd6bf383397ae85
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.txt
TXT122 136f2a9052a462cc2c69a636dee1aa96 1408
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.txt
TXT123 774f396eb7686cac3c214fc4e4481da6 313
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.txt
TXT124 962b210b2d6a73cb080c56ca12921297 792
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.txt
TXT125 dc35021938a8226b47a5f0bc8f156f98 644
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.txt
TXT126 fde3eba225bb72cee5d15ba980c15e37 793
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.txt
TXT127 a5a6eead6fa6774e3d9a03b0a81ee9f4 590
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.txt
TXT128 cd849305cfc95e8f463e81494b26a3e3 1435
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.txt
TXT129 be4cccafdaca951a9abde1f576f27286 1442
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.txt
TXT130 799058f9ce7842e5cfe9bafa53d58260 1315
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.txt
TXT131 ecac458f367c3caa38a7ed275a3d3ead 712
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.txt
TXT132 d6ceda3c3caac9424bb8de148c0831a9 983
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.txt
TXT133 b87915cb002dfd6014c9b42d64ebdc55 410
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.txt
TXT134 d8865109424f5658845532bb86b85c11 277
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.txt
TXT135 6adbcdc750f3236f35a54d9d8f097548 1425
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.txt
TXT136 7ec28a73a16b6295995bc1e9e41589af 1388
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.txt
TXT137 67c743a3bc3086a7589318e906c0b609 1370
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.txt
TXT138 6eff9e870e07201c5d39bf0fa35e0ec8 853
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.txt
TXT139 06c740d12d7f841a3a21aacd458152cf 1274
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.txt
TXT140 3ecf160c7f0b7fbf24c343e06950491b 1338
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.txt
TXT141 079aba181e541244f63d578974c1387f
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.txt
TXT142 52ebd76143926b3ce7264160a352bc88 1430
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.txt
TXT143 4fceeae963249fd89efe6465a72861e1 1358
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.txt
TXT144 6a8b8eb24436b8ae89bcd5935924f980 1460
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.txt
TXT145 953d2e683b4f97d4b59fbcb08dc7840a 1384
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.txt
TXT146 0ad58cf8c8466f7ed00435fb734fdfac 1243
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.txt
TXT147 124171b912563984e7394ef622fbfc8c
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.txt
TXT148 f278b00e21f9bb7eb9593b9b65f62b04
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.txt
TXT149 9467b96cea40730a28e7b5119fe90dbe 1354
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.txt
TXT150 51eabe1d6b917746d03d97bcf4da2911 1394
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.txt
TXT151 e029124b860d040f4ed81284679a3213 403
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.txt
TXT152 d4902e2ab57d025f267b2e9103464c97 1908
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.txt
TXT153 e21b167abfa52b28005f9a978d820f45 1650
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.txt
TXT154 eaea14ec70607885b6d17a3316a5f453 1283
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.txt
TXT155 954b2b45fd3a4d65b36500bc7d5205e2 571
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.txt
TXT156 7aa642a801a4d33d8af61f8b2b65e874
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.txt
TXT157 501aeb7bdff2cb8d4934ea572b600149 1312
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.txt
TXT158 0be4ecab130f3bd8e3c87d83a3b8a18c
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.txt
TXT159 9a42c85cabd8ab5130c46f84eac11ab4 1210
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.txt
TXT160 05a915d4b958868eaee5ca1c43bed151 1385
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.txt
TXT161 cbeb4646f6990f874265953dfcdff084
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.txt
TXT162 2a58efd3fc891ecae6542e5e72e2b9a6 1313
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.txt
TXT163 21ff0e5460d1b65ab2126edc41828023 1299
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.txt
TXT164 9a1851c474154900be6ba335b3bd07d4 1693
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.txt
TXT165 07c16e118f692ed475f4f4bee28b2db1 1923
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.txt
TXT166 2d879b6e216cd4bac35c3c4b36038800 1822
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.txt
TXT167 9a9700acd8ce91136b7bc63997a88a1a 1986
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.txt
TXT168 37243e12524430d707249442ebd4eac7 2023
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.txt
TXT169 694e232c3978e2ffd9faf1030ce177f9
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.txt
TXT170 8ca92d49852bb5c6e0f643eb585dc845 1247
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.txt
TXT171 9eb12dff5560ba313a33b9909b6b8f39 245
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.txt
TXT172 2acf34e027e49c65f65249670caa966c 1353
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.txt
PRO1 textx-pro b4f56c44448efe6597cae1aa827234f9 8010
needsassessmentf00grim_0000.pro
PRO2 65a960394d3b25995f0e54a1e67c57b0
needsassessmentf00grim_0001.pro
PRO3 499ccf98672b50ab158803abbed0153a
needsassessmentf00grim_0002.pro
PRO4 d4c6f0fe629923772748b36ad80692a0 28009
needsassessmentf00grim_0003.pro
PRO5 6f066ffcede54fe3f6c9597fe10ceead 3258
needsassessmentf00grim_0004.pro
PRO6 df300c767a4a198006342477f6d4b723 36772
needsassessmentf00grim_0005.pro
PRO7 055356774b4f37c79a2854e32e7b895f 16349
needsassessmentf00grim_0006.pro
PRO8 0fd53b6b2762e9843347a3a9d9100bec 33612
needsassessmentf00grim_0007.pro
PRO9 c0460e171ba0e4cb8a05250bcea994f0 35791
needsassessmentf00grim_0008.pro
PRO10 fee303f74476445cea20e43540806f2f 31220
needsassessmentf00grim_0009.pro
PRO11 460606cc22f13dba1a9ef5cf74a73e67 33499
needsassessmentf00grim_0010.pro
PRO12 c64f3e9efe7fc6b1069eb2c27402b173 40810
needsassessmentf00grim_0011.pro
PRO13 23eeb2d1d6f9fb023a33b08acf88f765 34125
needsassessmentf00grim_0012.pro
PRO14 9327350fea068d077ded3133a8b25825 41235
needsassessmentf00grim_0013.pro
PRO15 93202408936c25aa707de9ed154b40cd 34809
needsassessmentf00grim_0014.pro
PRO16 93b5697692508ce6b03b631b6252275e 35561
needsassessmentf00grim_0015.pro
PRO17 fcce15d5e8f3c30a5b93b5a1ce0ebcb5 37817
needsassessmentf00grim_0016.pro
PRO18 2df1f28c224f566b49518ca5a3cb5918 40785
needsassessmentf00grim_0017.pro
PRO19 a84dd90769b79dce626e15c2352b93cf 42064
needsassessmentf00grim_0018.pro
PRO20 73b96672b6b75d9a8eeb2902f8bc5a9d 37331
needsassessmentf00grim_0019.pro
PRO21 f511038acd26a906605721e481932d33 26271
needsassessmentf00grim_0020.pro
PRO22 1f61162cd3f5957852fc5b4e48771408 32788
needsassessmentf00grim_0021.pro
PRO23 afd80105e20aaadf14c23b8f73f30079 36543
needsassessmentf00grim_0022.pro
PRO24 d82374f3e6e9aba46c2db8c82ff059a5 28081
needsassessmentf00grim_0023.pro
PRO25 f7a75224058620b734625b8e27a3a258 27953
needsassessmentf00grim_0024.pro
PRO26 83cef18147baf512179ee1be3129da66 37748
needsassessmentf00grim_0025.pro
PRO27 95c238877df458df18bff3165ca2be01 36030
needsassessmentf00grim_0026.pro
PRO28 91eaa2d975e143f7f5d6f121f94e54cc 34482
needsassessmentf00grim_0027.pro
PRO29 eaa4d8ab58b0a395a7dd06df152cd6f8 22897
needsassessmentf00grim_0028.pro
PRO30 584aade5d904c5c78de0eb4e69aeff00 29115
needsassessmentf00grim_0029.pro
PRO31 e7777a276e0235363a4e63b8914e942b 39142
needsassessmentf00grim_0030.pro
PRO32 b8a33a068856a32bcd40ce701edc3630 35854
needsassessmentf00grim_0031.pro
PRO33 f72353f90a97a85d52bdace8e9debab4 32149
needsassessmentf00grim_0032.pro
PRO34 b93d2b3441a0022b4768f16a86bf46b3 35445
needsassessmentf00grim_0033.pro
PRO35 d413db1ad8238fc7ef5d55bd58205d6a 36436
needsassessmentf00grim_0034.pro
PRO36 6dbd7c57d715547c932dec301bf1bcfd 35252
needsassessmentf00grim_0035.pro
PRO37 3b2e511323f66d83990b5dd65fdfd9d6 35967
needsassessmentf00grim_0036.pro
PRO38 c46af640daedc9c2180d6b04d24c10ee 32677
needsassessmentf00grim_0037.pro
PRO39 0c792ca7acc259d78158ef16a04ceb88 34995
needsassessmentf00grim_0038.pro
PRO40 273735ffccc8412280adfcec39ef80c9 36119
needsassessmentf00grim_0039.pro
PRO41 d0d4431d0e21c0797d3832572b659c1a 35105
needsassessmentf00grim_0040.pro
PRO42 1de43376d6ba9d05bc9cbb2830f5fd23 33207
needsassessmentf00grim_0041.pro
PRO43 9946eb07f260c498938e20923c403ef0 35307
needsassessmentf00grim_0042.pro
PRO44 5bf9d035d6f3206aaaeddcf6207cb7fb 30378
needsassessmentf00grim_0043.pro
PRO45 4c36b1946ccbf42643b1b3dd6ad8232d 33045
needsassessmentf00grim_0044.pro
PRO46 1536c81c32fa2e284e14afb26f679701 34409
needsassessmentf00grim_0045.pro
PRO47 f1bdc42ca566a07212275b31569c5b8c 36241
needsassessmentf00grim_0046.pro
PRO48 ffb7c5c963beb9e3bf503f70b975a4c7 37447
needsassessmentf00grim_0047.pro
PRO49 d9438861a551e89f6ca2632995b52bae 32812
needsassessmentf00grim_0048.pro
PRO50 55ffc241706d22231459c9cd8d1a8707 30685
needsassessmentf00grim_0049.pro
PRO51 b0ca880c8f388fe166fd296d09debe76 36203
needsassessmentf00grim_0050.pro
PRO52 5071e3878c95ee2cbfce5f831d12035a 36016
needsassessmentf00grim_0051.pro
PRO53 e04b3c1fc63487fc65646713955ef810 36549
needsassessmentf00grim_0052.pro
PRO54 3d03664828fb94ee00af95f906ebd624 33996
needsassessmentf00grim_0053.pro
PRO55 2c17e073453b428d23ffeda8d83a9753 35839
needsassessmentf00grim_0054.pro
PRO56 900de9eeb00c2797f9d500a119da0262 34335
needsassessmentf00grim_0055.pro
PRO57 9af9b19ce940bfb175102d0c9e4aa692 39221
needsassessmentf00grim_0056.pro
PRO58 08a8eec5729ac9183029e5161633c80f 34271
needsassessmentf00grim_0057.pro
PRO59 62129ae5aa08cd39f0b8acdf1f7f17b7 36975
needsassessmentf00grim_0058.pro
PRO60 ecde89a77f349c4f496ad9dfdb9f678d 30232
needsassessmentf00grim_0059.pro
PRO61 a68bc55af836a934b39aefa9fef347da 35928
needsassessmentf00grim_0060.pro
PRO62 6938a390557747c5eb922366721cce27 35156
needsassessmentf00grim_0061.pro
PRO63 ccd0ab64d96345583b1e6191de5e8e41 35600
needsassessmentf00grim_0062.pro
PRO64 7cac5dab9de3385b71ac5a662dd10020 36240
needsassessmentf00grim_0063.pro
PRO65 cd063b5263ce1c4db141ca869801c379 35594
needsassessmentf00grim_0064.pro
PRO66 3d036d43c142d4a0aa5442d39b6479e1 35362
needsassessmentf00grim_0065.pro
PRO67 4ef1acceee8d2e84c59895fa0d52cd2a 34811
needsassessmentf00grim_0066.pro
PRO68 378d944c9fd1724522d70e48988bf958 37518
needsassessmentf00grim_0067.pro
PRO69 f08345fabdc818b662ad4119e92bdee9 33125
needsassessmentf00grim_0068.pro
PRO70 52993ca8ab5e3d3e9f83d02254cfd665 31877
needsassessmentf00grim_0069.pro
PRO71 f5c7bac7cd43cf959d192949f780f6d2 39287
needsassessmentf00grim_0070.pro
PRO72 38de68c50718ebb936143b44b9df8aef 36425
needsassessmentf00grim_0071.pro
PRO73 523f449be9cecd82e0f0b088ce3dcb83 35392
needsassessmentf00grim_0072.pro
PRO74 9d02939520a09fecf4878f96a07784aa 34520
needsassessmentf00grim_0073.pro
PRO75 310826ac3f49fd96ff8b5d1314e6bce0 40398
needsassessmentf00grim_0074.pro
PRO76 1e2c7ea22c0734041491f7643cbcb6ab 31561
needsassessmentf00grim_0075.pro
PRO77 9c6251721337291b21815ecc9fe0bd72 36500
needsassessmentf00grim_0076.pro
PRO78 0d56046235aa623ef06890a29bfcb485 28456
needsassessmentf00grim_0077.pro
PRO79 987999061385dd3726792562ebbf4aa4 34457
needsassessmentf00grim_0078.pro
PRO80 c48242ecf76c4793ad327871e945f121 37046
needsassessmentf00grim_0079.pro
PRO81 3476fe91993df91f8613a5854e799e12 36668
needsassessmentf00grim_0080.pro
PRO82 ce0ee8c0da062bc5c31f962207f7c1ef 35865
needsassessmentf00grim_0081.pro
PRO83 895fc7fe2144a12c41d69dd22954a95c 38095
needsassessmentf00grim_0082.pro
PRO84 666a30c181ce18a113a2bdfd20cbbe2e 36875
needsassessmentf00grim_0083.pro
PRO85 d6538c1c60ddbf4626b27e62d763f28d 36201
needsassessmentf00grim_0084.pro
PRO86 c631c33b7fce2ceae4428b019075f45e 36023
needsassessmentf00grim_0085.pro
PRO87 ac479114779495468572e66d2d2c0654 33912
needsassessmentf00grim_0086.pro
PRO88 b37f57e63fa3411d90cae21959232cdb 35352
needsassessmentf00grim_0087.pro
PRO89 5680a2ca475b02ba6795c667d0eb3e83 33089
needsassessmentf00grim_0088.pro
PRO90 95d45db6a72deeaf7ed517574812a6b9 36183
needsassessmentf00grim_0089.pro
PRO91 3e14b121994f99e856845cf99717febe 32868
needsassessmentf00grim_0090.pro
PRO92 f089fc06ce98c368b88ef073870360e3 37019
needsassessmentf00grim_0091.pro
PRO93 2e39ed04af9d485bbaf5cf0663ea0aa0 37530
needsassessmentf00grim_0092.pro
PRO94 9373e7b12511f39870f11ded990c2a78 31510
needsassessmentf00grim_0093.pro
PRO95 b067fa78aaf9c4de59c94b3281c6a0f1 34086
needsassessmentf00grim_0094.pro
PRO96 55a39ca9799615cca8cbf7068d95c927 33460
needsassessmentf00grim_0095.pro
PRO97 46a8d30fa2377e6f5f17819cc0dd59f0 34207
needsassessmentf00grim_0096.pro
PRO98 0a04573ad4a15386203a188d9e7e3931 35433
needsassessmentf00grim_0097.pro
PRO99 cfeabd5ea660def2d858e0304c071b12 37195
needsassessmentf00grim_0098.pro
PRO100 2446013cb8ad1307abd0fc0dfe20e30b 35443
needsassessmentf00grim_0099.pro
PRO101 22546d289c486cafa9a47a7a7b722f22 36656
needsassessmentf00grim_0100.pro
PRO102 76ac438f1593c81e6c0c1e8fddb0e749 34663
needsassessmentf00grim_0101.pro
PRO103 417c6029f0a4282102ca72a7b2bf46e5
needsassessmentf00grim_0102.pro
PRO104 2aafc93860d92db7beb3e3934ac5003f 37112
needsassessmentf00grim_0103.pro
PRO105 732e173c4be83b4f559ac1c67f113a30 35963
needsassessmentf00grim_0104.pro
PRO106 4c7d37bc99bc64a4a27ea6188da758a3 20161
needsassessmentf00grim_0105.pro
PRO107 48ba5ae35857c4293c628abccb619d21 26657
needsassessmentf00grim_0106.pro
PRO108 447d8d1bf168352943655497b480b14b 32555
needsassessmentf00grim_0107.pro
PRO109 779bf5d515339a9cafa08485596eb9a3 34448
needsassessmentf00grim_0108.pro
PRO110 3acc09ff125157830b14a63c22e2889e 32408
needsassessmentf00grim_0109.pro
PRO111 33f63a42654afd90678cb4a12f81897e 34633
needsassessmentf00grim_0110.pro
PRO112 b38fbd987670e8631986ef73a842f065 35187
needsassessmentf00grim_0111.pro
PRO113 0436d75961bec27cf5aa97996866f7d3 37284
needsassessmentf00grim_0112.pro
PRO114 4a446eca7624f1b3bdeca10ade1ccfbb 31662
needsassessmentf00grim_0113.pro
PRO115 99ca953c565d62251a5947d61a10a8d2 31942
needsassessmentf00grim_0114.pro
PRO116 e34bba2eeb23034d5673a353a3edcda9 33457
needsassessmentf00grim_0115.pro
PRO117 1da938cae69b79d10293a8a5edfeec85 16630
needsassessmentf00grim_0116.pro
PRO118 b5bc27f5db3ae685856e6c4de8e5f099 28395
needsassessmentf00grim_0117.pro
PRO119 4aadcc4cea308197b84caf5d25946877 21802
needsassessmentf00grim_0118.pro
PRO120 392f29e0ecb51ace5ce775cbab503195 8851
needsassessmentf00grim_0119.pro
PRO121 0be0901fdf340dbb5151b2f5614f3b5c 36323
needsassessmentf00grim_0120.pro
PRO122 ac296ae40c3c3aed9b57b679b350eff5 34852
needsassessmentf00grim_0121.pro
PRO123 44fbc2d6cfe31c3a8b816081385352fe 6572
needsassessmentf00grim_0122.pro
PRO124 1956315c900588b301bb8e289cb381d1 25053
needsassessmentf00grim_0123.pro
PRO125 beff12da1478a18b95890e66ad1f814b 22418
needsassessmentf00grim_0124.pro
PRO126 7adb9acca2ab27bcb3cb3284c04d0570 26310
needsassessmentf00grim_0125.pro
PRO127 0d61788c1cc49e605ce345b3e2da2882 21707
needsassessmentf00grim_0126.pro
PRO128 bdd36e1ce631c959a9be6b876f02b766 35720
needsassessmentf00grim_0127.pro
PRO129 53c905e6b38a3e66db9c350c2196e8db 35322
needsassessmentf00grim_0128.pro
PRO130 66edace4bbc5eae6e8448474ecd4ec78 32040
needsassessmentf00grim_0129.pro
PRO131 482b7ea1f709d0ee03f8bb78f4a63724 31805
needsassessmentf00grim_0130.pro
PRO132 5e63c0bdb7fa8fe63eab610dd1927c5c 41752
needsassessmentf00grim_0131.pro
PRO133 162a27d9471388af7c15c8e745e3c0e6 12167
needsassessmentf00grim_0132.pro
PRO134 a4222d9102a9abbe7cf083a49021c496 5165
needsassessmentf00grim_0133.pro
PRO135 a250f2e30806b0c1a090d8bd8ed1ffd2 33769
needsassessmentf00grim_0134.pro
PRO136 68a6929c278c5360445bee84864dc0e2 33274
needsassessmentf00grim_0135.pro
PRO137 f2f39450d91c2c7377cbb134888cf2da 33139
needsassessmentf00grim_0136.pro
PRO138 3d0abb3f803a9fa67d4e750914fa783a 20672
needsassessmentf00grim_0137.pro
PRO139 f2ddf08d5c90e8e9271e29b702fbee8b 29675
needsassessmentf00grim_0138.pro
PRO140 ac3d6a5e2c0213aff6e6c469a8eb316a 32180
needsassessmentf00grim_0139.pro
PRO141 49d22213b27dc2a1550957f02e1e1449 33616
needsassessmentf00grim_0140.pro
PRO142 66004e380db82108211e92a67c5ebe15 35330
needsassessmentf00grim_0141.pro
PRO143 64bed3584182ffbec565c1f061b5add6 32921
needsassessmentf00grim_0142.pro
PRO144 570775cd8bc7e4726ca7d44760c54095 36246
needsassessmentf00grim_0143.pro
PRO145 8f5e48795c1727c78828dab9191848c8 33794
needsassessmentf00grim_0144.pro
PRO146 d39dfb8407363e244f088d285dcfd310 29324
needsassessmentf00grim_0145.pro
PRO147 0f86ea619a41725c7e91a3ac41519106 31384
needsassessmentf00grim_0146.pro
PRO148 96570d4c686260e9566f6e546c97f876 32170
needsassessmentf00grim_0147.pro
PRO149 d2c072ec653434a073a6c7faad356682 33014
needsassessmentf00grim_0148.pro
PRO150 dd030ee5a9d8a1d775754ad526308c91 34394
needsassessmentf00grim_0149.pro
PRO151 90754867ed1456bb4b907ed84ad46bb1 9112
needsassessmentf00grim_0150.pro
PRO152 2fea82b84671de08739ca0f88d21db14 45808
needsassessmentf00grim_0151.pro
PRO153 22afef7d01a210d6439ad202306ec6ae 37978
needsassessmentf00grim_0152.pro
PRO154 0b2c1081ee0439361b67feb0f840623f 29293
needsassessmentf00grim_0153.pro
PRO155 38729fdbecac7e1bbeae979250327981 12067
needsassessmentf00grim_0154.pro
PRO156 28c8a7998824444ff07a08c3cd0cd70e 27106
needsassessmentf00grim_0155.pro
PRO157 a5928064dda0e1588b282b08899d9803 30813
needsassessmentf00grim_0156.pro
PRO158 c8abd5303119cb797a5e2e964de3c732 3142
needsassessmentf00grim_0157.pro
PRO159 17f3bb9ab4ba7081c78d5ad66f93a54e 26900
needsassessmentf00grim_0158.pro
PRO160 36d088d6f827913ff4e99636169d2349 33104
needsassessmentf00grim_0159.pro
PRO161 9e6346cc15e08611d9be8e5a1578ab40 31567
needsassessmentf00grim_0160.pro
PRO162 f8406d781c82c30886ddbb044d6d4617 30397
needsassessmentf00grim_0161.pro
PRO163 f132d9cc27d2898f21a47266cd311be3 31083
needsassessmentf00grim_0162.pro
PRO164 3d47a0fcaa689d9a49f8c9f89ce2da1f 39849
needsassessmentf00grim_0163.pro
PRO165 821fca3f4881a18c1ea34eccf5f396ca 45394
needsassessmentf00grim_0164.pro
PRO166 0620fbbcb8e5beefa42532689de7f5d9 43600
needsassessmentf00grim_0165.pro
PRO167 b5b0e46a4c09421da1332750065aa0d6 47195
needsassessmentf00grim_0166.pro
PRO168 ccc0d8e9ac557c1af15cc6b1b87b032c 47707
needsassessmentf00grim_0167.pro
PRO169 71ef1102aa2cabf827d530b514352ec9 21301
needsassessmentf00grim_0168.pro
PRO170 a630f0cc719210ac134dfe6d1ec7ba97 30178
needsassessmentf00grim_0169.pro
PRO171 e3d6ecc7341d78546a514597fc37d2c3 5205
needsassessmentf00grim_0170.pro
PRO172 859693e14ae7b93359d0b325390a8e3e 28620
needsassessmentf00grim_0171.pro
PDF1 applicationpdf f9c16f2f5a548d5f5efb71bb25ec9d0d 5381886
needsassessmentf00grim.pdf
METS2 unknownx-mets 5befcb17ba0d15d71cc336a8e9066e97 187782
AA00032025_00001.mets
METS:structMap STRUCT1 physical
METS:div DMDID ADMID A ORDER 0 main
PDIV1 1 Title Page
PAGE1 i
METS:fptr FILEID
PAGE2 ii 2
PDIV2 Dedication
PAGE3 iii
PDIV3 Acknowledgements 3 Section
PAGE4 iv
PAGE5 v
PDIV4 4 Table Contents
PAGE6 vi
PAGE7 vii
PDIV5 5 Abstract
PAGE8 viii
PAGE9 ix
PDIV6 Chapter 1. Introduction 6
PAGE10
PAGE11
PAGE12
PAGE13
PAGE14
PAGE15
PAGE16 7
PAGE17 8
PAGE18 9
PAGE19 10
PAGE20 11
PAGE21 12
PAGE22 13
PAGE23 14
PAGE24 15
PAGE25 16
PAGE26 17
PAGE27 18
PAGE28 19
PAGE29 20
PDIV7 2. Review literature
PAGE30 21
PAGE31 22
PAGE32 23
PAGE33 24
PAGE34 25
PAGE35 26
PAGE36 27
PAGE37 28
PAGE38 29
PAGE39 30
PAGE40 31
PAGE41 32
PAGE42 33
PAGE43 34
PAGE44 35
PAGE45 36
PAGE46 37
PAGE47 38
PAGE48 39
PAGE49 40
PAGE50 41
PAGE51 42
PAGE52 43
PAGE53 44
PAGE54 45
PAGE55 46
PAGE56 47
PAGE57 48
PAGE58 49
PAGE59 50
PAGE60 51
PAGE61 52
PAGE62 53
PAGE63 54
PAGE64 55
PAGE65 56
PAGE66 57
PAGE67 58
PAGE68 59
PAGE69 60
PAGE70 61
PAGE71 62
PAGE72 63
PAGE73 64
PAGE74 65
PAGE75 66
PAGE76 67
PAGE77 68
PAGE78 69
PAGE79 70
PAGE80 71
PAGE81 72
PAGE82 73
PAGE83 74
PAGE84 75
PAGE85 76
PAGE86 77
PAGE87 78
PAGE88 79
PAGE89 80
PAGE90 81
PAGE91 82
PAGE92 83
PAGE93 84
PAGE94 85
PAGE95 86
PAGE96 87
PAGE97 88
PAGE98 89
PAGE99 90
PAGE100 91
PAGE101 92
PAGE102 93
PAGE103 94
PAGE104 95
PAGE105 96
PAGE106 97
PDIV8 3. Procedures
PAGE107 98
PAGE108 99
PAGE109 100
PAGE110 101
PAGE111 102
PAGE112
PAGE113 104
PAGE114 105
PAGE115 106
PAGE116 107
PAGE117 108
PDIV9 4. Results study
PAGE118 109
PAGE119 110
PAGE120 111
PAGE121 112
PAGE122 113
PAGE123 114
PAGE124 115
PAGE125 116
PAGE126 117
PAGE127 118
PAGE128
PAGE129 120
PAGE130 121
PAGE131 122
PAGE132 123
PAGE133 124
PAGE134 125
PAGE135 126
PAGE136 127
PAGE137 128
PAGE138 129
PDIV10 5. Summary, discussion, and conclusions
PAGE139 130
PAGE140 131
PAGE141 132
PAGE142 133
PAGE143 134
PAGE144 135
PAGE145 136
PAGE146 137
PAGE147 138
PAGE148 139
PAGE149 140
PAGE150 141
PAGE151 142
PDIV11 Appendix A. Needs questionnaire
PAGE152 143
PAGE153 144
PAGE154 145
PAGE155 146
PDIV12 B. policy on alcoholism
PAGE156 147
PAGE157 148
PAGE158
PDIV13 C. Delaware: treatment employees whose use alcohol affects their performance
PAGE159 150
PAGE160 151
PAGE161 152
PAGE162 153
PAGE163 154
PDIV14 References
PAGE164 155
PAGE165 156
PAGE166 157
PAGE167 158
PAGE168 159
PAGE169 160
PDIV15 Biographical sketch
PAGE170 161
PAGE171 162
PAGE172 163
STRUCT2 other
ODIV1 Main
FILES1
FILES2