# Anesthesia Wellness Committee — First 90 Days **For: new committees, reset committees, and committees transitioning to a new Chair.** The objective of the first 90 days is institutional credibility, not volume of activity. Most wellness committees that fail do so because they launched five programs in the first quarter and delivered none of them well. A committee that launches two programs, measures them, and reports transparently to leadership has already outperformed most peers at 12 months. --- ## Pre-launch (before Week 1) Prerequisites that must be in place before the 90-day clock starts: - [ ] Department chief verbally supports establishment of the Committee - [ ] A named Chair candidate has agreed to serve and has been assured of protected time (0.05–0.10 FTE) - [ ] Institutional approval, if required, has been obtained or scoped - [ ] Initial budget allocation is approved in principle (specific amount can be finalized during Weeks 3–4) If any of the above is missing, delay the 90-day launch. Starting without these elements produces a committee that cannot meaningfully act. ## Weeks 1–2 — Foundation ### Deliverables - Draft charter (use `charter-template.md`) with all bracketed fields populated - Membership slate of 4–6 voting members plus trainee and administrative liaison - Monthly meeting recurrence on calendars for 12 months - Shared documentation repository with appropriate access controls - Local resource directory drafted (Appendix A of the charter) ### Key meetings - 1:1 between Chair and department chief to confirm scope, decision rights, and reporting cadence - First full committee meeting — charter review and ratification ### Common failure mode Attempting to draft the charter by committee in the first meeting. Draft it solo, circulate, amend in the meeting. ## Weeks 3–4 — Baseline ### Deliverables - Baseline survey deployed department-wide using a validated instrument (Mini-Z 2.0 or Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index). Anonymous, voluntary, aggregated reporting only. 2-week open window. - Inventory of existing institutional resources: EAP, physician support line, state peer assistance, second-victim response program, chief wellness officer, chaplaincy, pastoral care - Gap analysis contrasting available resources with what providers actually know about and use - Peer responder volunteer solicitation (for second-victim team if not already established) ### Key meetings - Second committee meeting — review baseline design and resource inventory - 1:1 between Chair and HR or department analytics partner to scope access to aggregate turnover data ### Common failure mode Designing a custom survey instead of using a validated one. Custom surveys are not benchmarkable and undermine credibility with leadership. ## Weeks 5–8 — Select two programs Review baseline data with the committee. Select exactly **two** programs to launch in this first cycle. Resist the urge to launch five. ### Selection criteria, in order 1. Evidence of effectiveness from published literature 2. Feasibility given current budget and Chair capacity 3. Addresses a concern that surfaced in baseline data 4. Produces a measurable outcome within 90 days of launch ### High-ROI options, ranked | Rank | Program | Evidence | Startup cost | |------|---------|----------|--------------| | 1 | Schedule review with fatigue metrics | Strong | Low (scheduler access, no new spend) | | 2 | Second-victim peer responder team | Strong (forYOU / RISE evidence base) | Moderate (training, coverage) | | 3 | Confidential SUD / distress intake channel | Moderate (expert consensus) | Low | | 4 | Structured onboarding for new grads and transitions | Moderate | Low–moderate | | 5 | Validated annual survey with transparent reporting | Strong (longitudinal benefit) | Low (licensing only) | ### Do not select | Program | Why not | |---------|---------| | Mandatory annual resilience training | Negative evidence; associates wellness with compliance burden | | Pizza parties as primary burnout response | Signals the department does not take the problem seriously | | Yoga or mindfulness as a singular intervention | Not harmful but insufficient as the program | | Wellness newsletters | Low readership; reallocate budget to 1:1 peer support | ## Weeks 9–12 — Launch, measure, report ### Deliverables - Selected programs launched with explicit announcement from the department chief (not HR) - Early engagement metrics captured (attendance, utilization, unsolicited feedback) - First quarterly report to the department chief — one page, use the structure in `leadership-brief-template.md` - Committee retrospective — what went well, what stalled, what to adjust in Month 4 ### Key meetings - Monthly meetings 2 and 3 of the launch period - Quarterly strategy session at Week 12 ### Common failure mode Waiting until results are perfect before reporting. Report at Week 12 even if results are incomplete; name what's known, what isn't, and when the next data point lands. --- ## Risk register Risks likely to derail a first-90-days launch and their mitigations: | Risk | Likelihood | Mitigation | |------|------------|------------| | Chair is not given protected time | High | Refuse to start until time is allocated in writing | | Baseline survey response rate under 40% | Moderate | Run two reminder cycles; chief-signed announcement | | Peer-review privilege not clearly established | High in some states | Institutional counsel review of charter before launch | | First-initiative outcome is unflattering | Moderate | Pre-commit to transparent reporting; frame as baseline | | Chair burnout during launch quarter | Moderate | Vice Chair shadows from Week 1; protected time honored | ## Accelerated timeline (30 days) For departments with strong executive sponsorship, an existing resource inventory, and a pre-identified Chair, the following compressed timeline is viable: - **Week 1:** Charter ratified, membership confirmed, recurring meetings scheduled - **Week 2:** Baseline survey deployed, resource inventory finalized - **Week 3:** Two programs selected and launched - **Week 4:** First leadership report and committee retrospective Do not attempt the accelerated timeline without verified executive sponsorship and a Chair with demonstrably protected time. ## What comes after Day 90 Months 4–12: - Add a third program if Programs 1 and 2 are performing - Re-survey at 12 months using the same baseline instrument - Expand peer responder team if indicated by event volume - Prepare annual board-level report - Plan Chair succession — Vice Chair begins shadowing leadership-facing interactions By Month 12, the Committee should be able to answer five questions on a single page: 1. What did you do? 2. What did you measure? 3. What changed? 4. What did you stop doing? 5. What do you need for the next cycle? If those five answers are clear and data-supported, the committee has done its job.