Critique 

Pitney Bowes Inc. - Health Care University

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: Pitney Bowes Health Care University bridges a prior patchwork of programs for 5,000 employees to an advanced disability and disease management structure being extended to 23,000 employees worldwide. Results to date include a 5 percent reduction in health care costs over three years, emergency visits by participants down by half, substantially lower sick days and much higher productivity by participants and an ergonomics program that demonstrates 5 to 1 return on investment.

Use of data analysis systems to evaluate health care claims cost and utilization for the program, controlling for differences between participants and non-participants, with 7 percent lower covered expenses in participants and a decrease in emergency room visits for the self-care program. This is an integrated program with many components. Cost-savings are 2.8 to 1 with $245 saved for $87 spent. The savings from Take Care of Yourself are 3 to 1 counting only emergency room visits. Utilizes a $25 incentive payment effectively. Program targets demand management, disability management, and disease management-prevention. There are ongoing research studies and a solid approach to measurement.

PSA screening of asymptomatic men is not recommended by most preventive services analyses. Little longitudinal data is presented here. The participant versus non-participant study design is not the strongest possible and participation is only 1/3. The program should be extended to dependents.