Critique 

L.L. Bean Inc. - Employee Health Program

The following assessment of program strengths and weaknesses has been abstracted from reviews by the Task Force on Program Selection of The Health Project. Where weaknesses are postulated, it must be taken into account that the review Task Force is very critical, that no programs are perfect, that the Award Winning programs have been selected from over 300 candidate programs and represent the very best, that the materials reviewed may have been incomplete, that suggested deficiencies may have resulted from incomplete understanding of the program by the reviewers or that any problems may have been corrected since the time of review.

Evaluation: The L.L. Bean Health and Fitness Programs are evaluated through internal analyses, employee feedback and external bench marking with costs almost half the regional average. Bonus credits reward employees and families for completing programs in smoking, nutrition, pre-natal care, breast self examination, health risk appraisal, cholesterol and blood pressure.

Generously funded. Linked with the Maine Medical Center and Dartmouth program materials. Costs are rising less than the average of the Northeastern states. There are dramatic claims changes. The program is comprehensive. The SF-36 is used to measure outcomes. There are high rates of participation and claims costs are tracked. There is a long-term corporate commitment and a variety of program offerings. Benchmarks have been developed to evaluate results. There is documented change in a few risk factors. Employees are very satisfied with the program. There are good savings and workers compensation data. External and positive review by Johnson and Johnson was conducted in 1992.

Evaluation data is sometimes sketchy. Medical claims for the company is quite favorable but it is not possible to pinpoint factors which contribute to positive results and estimated cost-savings. The evaluation plan was not felt sufficiently rigorous to absolutely document cost-savings by some reviewers. Good participation rates were found in some programs but not in others.