PRC Workforce · Anonymous Digital Protocol · Professional Reality Check™

The 90%* your EAP
doesn't reach.

PRC-derived figure: 100% minus current EAP utilisation of 10%+. EAPA UK, Securing the Future of the EAP, 2024

A 90-day anonymous digital protocol for the senior professionals, mid-tier leaders, and high-functioning people who will not self-refer. No clinical pathway. No HR involvement. No names recorded.

Runs on email. Scales to your entire workforce. Sits alongside your existing EAP and Occupational Health provision — no change to either contract required.

Book a Call with Jon Read the Strategic Brief
The financial case · hard cash, not lost output
£30,614
Hard cash to replace one senior lost under the load — before the day-one SSP now due on every absence the pattern generates (April 2026)
Replacement cost: Oxford Economics & Unum, 2014 · SSP: DWP, 2025
>
£9,750
Annual licence cost · 250-employee organisation · Standard pricing (£39/emp/yr)
Fixed cost. Works on the pattern before it becomes either bill.

From April 2026, the pattern also costs you in cash. Statutory Sick Pay is now due from day one of every absence it generates — short or long — at £123.25 a week: roughly £13 a head across the workforce (about £3,300 on 250 staff), and £3,000+ for each long-term case over its 28-week limit. That is unavoidable payroll cash, not a presenteeism estimate. Lose the person and replacement runs to £30,614. The £9,750 licence works on the pattern before either bill lands — and the lost output while they run under capacity (a separate £10,500 on one senior) sits on top.

10%+

Now use their EAP in a typical year, up from around 4% previously.

EAPA UK, Securing the Future of the EAP, 2024

22.1m

Working days lost to work-related stress, depression or anxiety in 2024/25 — of 35.7 million total work-related ill-health days.

HSE Health and Safety Statistics, 2024/25

£400m

New annual SSP cost added to UK employers from April 2026. Every absence now triggers SSP from day one. The cost of the underlying pattern is now a direct payroll liability, not just a presenteeism estimate.

DWP, Employment Rights Act 2025 Economic Analysis (January 2026)

The Problem

You already know something is not adding up.

22.1 million working days lost to work-related stress, depression or anxiety in 2024/25. 1 in 4 of your people say work is negatively affecting their health. The provision is in place. It is not reaching the people who need it most.

HSE Health and Safety Statistics, 2024/25 · CIPD Good Work Index, 2025

Your senior professionals, mid-tier leaders, the high-functioning people carrying the most weight. They will not use the EAP. Not because they do not need it. Because using it means putting their name on a list. And they have done the maths on what that costs them.

Career. Insurance. How they are seen. The clinical route leaves a record. A record gets asked about. They know this before you say a word about it. So they perform through it instead. Quietly. Expensively. Until they cannot.

Why I built this

I was one of those people. I knew exactly what the cost of carrying on was.

I was building property developments. Investors in the room. Banks. Architects. People whose opinion of me was directly connected to money moving and contracts signing.

I had a pattern that was running everything. I could see the cost of it. I could not see a route out that did not cost me more.

A room full of strangers was not something I was considering. Nothing written down with my name on it. I was going to handle it myself, on my own terms, or not at all.

What I eventually understood was that I had been applying the wrong kind of solution to the right problem. Willpower and rules work on the surface. The mechanism underneath needs something different. It needs to be mapped, examined, and replaced. Not fought.

Twelve years ago I acted on that. Twelve years later the pattern has not come back. Not because I am stronger. Because the conditions that fed it no longer exist in the same way.

"The thing that felt like it had to stay secret turned out to be just a chapter. A long one. But a chapter."

PRC is what I needed then. Private. Structured. No labels, no rooms, no one's permission required. Built to address the mechanism. Not just manage the surface.

Your people are not weak. They are doing exactly what a high-functioning professional does when the standard routes are not safe. They are performing through it. PRC is built for that specific population. The one your EAP does not reach.

There are no anonymous testimonials on this page. There is one case study. It is mine.

12 years pattern-free
8 years frontline pattern-support experience
Trained support worker, pattern-based intervention
Direct access on every tier
How PRC Solves It

Anonymity is structurally impossible to breach. Not promised. Architected.

The difference between PRC and every other form of workforce provision is not a privacy promise. It is architecture. No system exists in which a name can be matched to a seat.

Your people enrol on a personal device, on a personal email. The employer does not know who is in the programme. There is no list to be on. There is nothing to breach.

What you see as the buyer

Seat numbers. Completion. Aggregate movement.

How many seats are occupied. Completion rate. How the group score moved from Day 1 to Day 90. That is the full picture. Nothing more exists in the system.

What your people see

A 90-day protocol. No name on anything.

They enrol privately. They run the protocol privately. Nothing is created that identifies them, labels them, or has to be declared to an insurer or an employer.

Why it works when nothing else does

The professional who will not self-refer will do this.

Because nothing they do inside the protocol can come back to them. The mechanism that stops them using everything else is removed. Not managed. Removed.

"Your organisation sees seat numbers, completion rates, and aggregate outcome movement. Everything that tells you it is working. Nothing that identifies who is in it."

PRC Workforce is a site-wide digital architecture. No IT integration required. No HR system involvement. No seat caps. No rationing decisions. Anyone in your workforce can enrol privately at any time, from any device, without touching your infrastructure. This is a licence, not a headcount allocation. It scales to your entire organisation from the day of procurement.

Why Existing Provision Fails

The format is the barrier. Not the person.

Every standard route to support requires the one thing a high-functioning professional will not do: identify themselves as someone who needs it. PRC is built for the way your workforce actually operates.

Disclosure barriers and career risk: Dewa et al., Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2021 · Brohan et al., BMC Psychiatry, 2012

The EAP

Built around self-identification and voluntary referral. The 90%* who will not use it are not malfunctioning. They have assessed the cost of being known. The format makes it structurally inaccessible to the population it most needs to reach.

The wellbeing platform

Content on demand. No structure. No accountability. No mechanism for the person who has been performing through something for two years and is not going to browse a meditation library to address it.

Management referral

The referral path that requires the manager to notice, the HR Director to handle, and the individual to have something on file. The person who is managing it privately will not self-surface. They will leave instead.

Group programmes

Require presence, identity, and participation. The senior professional doing the maths on career and insurance implications will not sit in a room with colleagues. Not because of the room. Because of the record the room creates.

Employers have already gone looking for a better answer. They have not found one. When the EAP does not land, the next step is usually an app, a platform, or a stack of point solutions. In 2024 the University of Oxford tested around ninety such programmes across 46,336 UK employees in 233 organisations. Only one improved the outcome it was built to move, and it was volunteering. Not one of the apps, classes or coaching schemes did.

The reason does not change. Each new tool swaps the format — an app for a phone line, a portal for a leaflet — but leaves the barrier untouched. Every one of them still asks the person to put their hand up and be known. The senior professional who has done the maths on a clinical record will not, so the 90%* stay exactly where they were. PRC is the only route that removes the identification step instead of redecorating it.

Fleming, University of Oxford · Industrial Relations Journal, 2024 — 46,336 employees across 233 organisations

PRC sits alongside your existing EAP and OH provision. It does not replace either. The population PRC reaches barely overlaps with the population currently using your EAP or Occupational Health. Your existing provision continues to handle disclosed, clinical, and case-managed need exactly as it does now. PRC is the additional layer for the 90%* who will not self-refer into either route. Procuring PRC requires no change to your current EAP or OH contract.

Have questions about fit, cost, or how it works alongside your current provision? Every objection answered here →  ·  Full features and financial case →

The insurance problem nobody talks about in the room

On an income protection application, a life cover renewal, a critical illness form, there will be a question about treatment for a mental health condition. Disclose it and the premium loads. Withhold it and the policy voids at claim. Your senior professionals have already done this calculation before you open any conversation about support.

PRC creates no clinical record. Nothing inside the protocol has to be declared to an insurer. The non-clinical structure is not a workaround. It is the reason PRC works where everything else does not.

Mind UK, 2022: how mental health treatment affects insurance cover

How It Works

57 inputs. 14 worksheets. 90 days. One mechanism.

These are micro-inputs, not homework. Each one takes under a minute. Four or five arrive in a week — under four minutes of writing in total. If you have time to send a short email, you have time to run the protocol. The load is deliberately trivial, because an exhausted professional will not sustain anything that is not.

PRC is a fixed-sequence digital protocol delivered by email. Three pillars. Daily in Pillar 1, four times a week in Pillar 2, twice a week in Pillar 3.

No app to download. No system to log into. No IT involvement required. Runs entirely on email and self-directed worksheets.

The worksheets are not attachments. Each one arrives as an email containing the questions. Participants write their answers in their own private record, on their own device, and send them to nobody. The only thing that reaches a system is a single number on the dashboard.

1
Days 1–30 · Daily · Mapping

Mapping the pattern

Daily structured inputs. The participant identifies and documents the trigger sequence, the pre-response window, and the operational cost of the automatic response. Output: a mapped pattern with a self-rated PRC Index baseline.

Business outcome: invisible losses are made visible and quantified.

Framework: functional analysis (Beck, 1979), behavioural chain analysis (Linehan, 1993). The evidence →

2
Days 31–60 · 4× per week · Redesign

Changing the conditions

The trigger conditions identified in Pillar 1 are changed structurally. Environment, scheduling, and exposure are redesigned. This is not motivational. It operates on the mechanism, not the resolve. Day 30 PRC Index review.

Business outcome: hours recovered, decisions streamlined, mental overhead reduced.

Framework: stimulus control, Wood and Neal (2007), Wood, Tam and Witt (2005).

3
Days 61–90 · 2× per week · Installation

Installing the replacement

A deliberate replacement response is installed using specific cue-response pairings. By Day 90 it runs without the protocol. Day 60 and Day 90 PRC Index assessments. Aggregate movement reported to the organisation quarterly.

Business outcome: the operational gain runs permanently, without ongoing input.

Framework: implementation intention (Gollwitzer, 1999), automaticity formation (Lally et al., 2010).

Full evidence, research mapping, and scope of practice statement: The Evidence →

See what the protocol produces at Day 90: Sample reports — employer and participant →

30 minutes. No obligation. Book a call to cover your current provision spend, utilisation, and whether PRC fits your workforce.

Book a Call with Jon Read the Brief
The Mechanism

A trigger fires a behaviour. PRC replaces the behaviour on the same trigger.

Most of what a person does at work — and at home — is automatic. A pattern fires in response to a specific situation before any decision is made. When the default pattern is the wrong one, it costs output consistently and silently.

PRC works on the pattern. No perspective shift required. No insight required. No agreement that anything is wrong.

Before PRC — default pattern running
Trigger
A specific situation occurs
→
Default behaviour
Pattern fires automatically — no decision made
→
Output cost
Reduced performance, capacity, or consistency
After PRC — replacement pattern installed
Same trigger
The same situation occurs
→
New behaviour
Replacement fires instead — still automatic
→
Output gain
Higher performance, capacity, consistency

What changed? Only the behaviour that fires on the trigger. The trigger is identical. The replacement was practised under the same conditions until it ran faster than the old one. The old pattern was not removed — it was outcompeted. The participant does not need to understand why the old pattern existed. They do not need to want to change. They need to complete the inputs.

The pattern does not know whether you are at work or at home.

The same default pattern that costs output at work fires on the same trigger at home. The drain from one reduces what is available for the other. PRC addresses patterns in context — whichever context they operate in.

At work

Patterns that quietly tax output

Defaults that fire under sustained load and high-stakes decisions. Not character flaws — patterns, and patterns can be replaced. Small and easy to route around at first, until they are not.

Example

Under load, the default is to protect the calendar. The hard conversation slides a week. The decision waits for “a bit more information”. The diary fills with everything except the thing that moves the number. Nothing dramatic — a steady tax on velocity the person can see and cannot quite stop.

Example

Left unaddressed, it hardens. Commitments made in the room stop being reliable. The team stops bringing decisions forward because they cannot predict the response. What began as a delay becomes a bottleneck the organisation routes around — and the cost stops being one person’s.

At home

The same pattern, no boundary at the front door

PRC does not target domestic circumstances or relationships. But a pattern running at work does not switch off at the front door. What it costs at home is subtracted from what is available at work the next morning.

Example

The workday ends but the switch does not flip. The laptop reopens after dinner. The inbox gets one more pass. The day never formally closes — common enough to miss, until it is the default and the load never clears.

Example

Over months, the gaps that would let the load clear disappear. The person is present but not fully available, and each morning starts a little further behind than the last. The cost does not stay at home — it is what home stops restoring for work.

Why the two contexts are inseparable

Capacity is a single resource. It does not have a work version and a home version.

A person managing an unresolved pattern at home arrives at work the following morning with less available than a person who is not. This is not a clinical observation. It is an operational one. A depleted senior professional operates below their productive capacity. The cause is irrelevant to the employer. The output gap is not.

At work
Pattern costs output, velocity, consistency
↔
The pattern
One trigger. One automatic behaviour. Runs in both contexts.
↔
At home
Same pattern costs recovery, capacity, and the next day’s output

Replace the pattern once. It stops running in both places. Because the replacement is built on the trigger — not the setting — when the trigger fires at home, the new behaviour runs there too. The participant does not need to do the work twice.

For HR Directors & buyers

Organisation brief

Covers the organisational case, the financial anchor, the reach argument, and why PRC addresses the 90%* your EAP does not. The protocol, the anonymity architecture, and the evidence base in plain language.

Read the Organisation Brief →
For participants & employees

What the protocol does

A plain-language explanation of the mechanism, the 90-day sequence, how it operates at work and at home, what the employer sees and does not see, and what PRC does not claim. No clinical language.

Download the participant document (PDF) →
Privacy

No names. No records. No infrastructure.

The anonymity is not a privacy policy. It is the technical structure of the product. The employer has no route to a name. No list, no HR pathway, and no report that resolves below the cohort. This is not a promise that can be broken. It is an architecture with nothing to break.

Enrolment

Participants enrol using a personal email on a personal device. A random 4-digit seat ID is assigned. No name. No work email. No HR system involvement. The organisation purchases a licence. It does not assign seats.

What the system holds

The email address the participant enrols with, a seat number, and their PRC Index numbers. The email address sits with the email delivery platform because the protocol is delivered by email. It is never visible to the employer and appears in no report. Nothing the participant writes is held: written answers stay in their own private record and never enter the system.

What the employer sees

Seat occupancy, completion rate, and aggregate PRC Index movement across the cohort. Reported quarterly. Nothing that identifies any individual. Nothing that can be cross-referenced against a personnel file.

No clinical record

PRC is not a clinical service. No clinical record is created. Nothing in the protocol has to be declared to an insurer, an employer, or any third party. This is structural, not procedural.

"The employer knows the protocol is running and whether it is working. They do not know who is running it. This is by design, not by policy."

Full technical and legal disclosures: prcworkforce.com/disclosures.html

For procurement, legal and data protection

The anonymity claim is enforced in code, and we will show you the code.

What the system holds, what it never receives, who can identify a participant, how long it is kept, and the controls that stop one person’s figures being read out of a cohort report. Including the limits of that design, which we state rather than wait to be asked about.

Where your information goes
Reporting

Each participant self-rates on seven operational measures at Days 1, 30, 60, and 90. The employer receives aggregate movement across the cohort. Reported quarterly, not on fixed calendar dates. The reporting is tied to protocol completion cycles, not the procurement date.

Day 1

Baseline

Seven measures, 1–10. Self-rated. Establishes the starting position.

Day 30

First review

End of Pillar 1. Mapping complete. Pattern identified and documented.

Day 60

Second review

End of Pillar 2. Redesign applied. Environmental change in operation.

Day 90

Final assessment

Protocol complete. Replacement default running. Aggregate movement reported.

HR Director view · Aggregate cohort reporting Dashboard preview · illustrative layout, not results from a completed cohort
24
Seats occupied
this quarter
87%
Completion rate
Pillar 1 → Pillar 3
+2.4
Avg PRC Index movement
Day 1 → Day 90
Q2
Next aggregate
report due
Measure Day 1 avg Day 90 avg Movement
Output quality 5.1 7.4
+2.3
Decision confidence 4.8 7.1
+2.3
Focus & concentration 4.2 6.9
+2.7
Presence in meetings 5.3 7.6
+2.3
Energy management 4.5 7.0
+2.5
Recovery between demands 4.0 6.5
+2.5
Perceived operational capacity 4.9 7.3
+2.4

This is what the HR Director sees. No individual scores. No names. No seat identifiers. Cohort-level aggregate movement only. In this example the 24 participants would be anonymous to the organisation and to each other. Seat occupancy is confirmed; identity is not recorded at any point.

Participant view · Personal protocol dashboard · Seat #0047 Dashboard preview · illustrative layout, not results from a completed cohort
Protocol day
Day 42
Pillar 2 · 48 days remaining
PRC Index · current
5.6
+0.7 since Day 1 baseline
PRC Index trend · Days 1, 30, 60, 90
10 7.5 5 2.5 Day 42 4.9 5.3 – –
Day 1 Day 30 Day 60 Day 90
Output quality
5.8/10
Decision confidence
5.5/10
Focus & concentration
5.3/10
Presence in meetings
6.1/10
Energy management
5.7/10
Recovery between demands
5.2/10
Perceived operational capacity
5.9/10
Email archive · recent inputs
D42The gap between the trigger and what you did with itReceived
D40You have changed the conditions. Now you document it.Read
D38The version of you that is running at 70% is still operationalRead
D35Touch Point 5 · Mid-Pillar 2 worksheetRead

This is what the participant sees. No name. No employer visibility. Seat #0047 is the only identifier in the system. The organisation cannot access this view, cannot cross-reference this seat against any personnel record, and receives no information about which measures are rated and by how much at individual level.

The PRC Index is a set of seven self-report measures rated 1–10. It is not independently validated as a clinical outcome measure. It tracks how the participant rates their own observable output across the 90-day period. Nothing more is claimed. The reporting methodology follows measurement-based care principles: Delgadillo et al., Lancet Psychiatry, 2018.

The Case Study
Before

Running the cleanup

The default was running everything. Six days of work going into five, not because the workload demanded it, but because most of yesterday’s work needed checking. Tasks deferred daily. Mental overhead constant.

The only thing stopping the business from moving was me. And I could not see it. The mechanism underneath was running the operation. I was running the cleanup.

After

Running the business

The default stopped running. Not because I fought it, but because the conditions that fed it changed. Work moved differently. Decisions landed cleaner. The mental overhead that had been running silently in the background came back as time and capacity.

The business started moving again. Not because I worked harder. Because I stopped being the bottleneck.

12 years operating at capacity. As close to it as any day allows. No clinical pathway. No group. No label. No one else’s permission required.

Cost exposure

What is under-capacity costing you?

Put in the group you want to look at — your whole workforce, or one team — and see the annual exposure against the cost of the licence.

£
How many of them are affected?30%

A conservative default — the share running below capacity. Modelling one team? Put that team's size and salary above.

If PRC recovers this share of the lost capacity10%

— recovered, against a licence of —. This is mostly restored output rather than cash: only the SSP portion shows up on payroll. A deliberately conservative dial, so set it to whatever you would believe.

Your estimated annual exposure

—

Under-capacity · 30% affected—
Day-one SSP, from Apr 2026—
Your PRC licence · —
—

—

of your exposure is all you'd need to recover to cover the licence for the year.

Illustrative, using published UK averages; your own figures will differ. The 44 days is presenteeism — lost output while people are at work but under par (IPPR, 2024) — applied to the share you set. Day-one SSP: ~£13 per employee, a PRC derivation from the DWP total (DWP, January 2026).
Investment

The way HR Directors already buy. Per employee. Per year.

PRC Workforce is priced like the EAP, the benefits platform, and the broker pipeline. One number per employee per year. No seat caps. No rationing decisions. Anyone in your workforce can enrol privately at any time.

The site-wide licence is not a pricing model. It is a privacy mechanism. Allocate specific seats and you create a list — a record of who was picked out. That record is the exact thing the people this protocol is built for will not go near. Licence the whole workforce and access identifies no one, because everyone has it. The population you will never persuade to self-refer can enrol inside a group large enough to disappear into. You are not paying for 250 people to run the protocol. You are paying for 250 so the handful who do cannot be counted. The denominator protects the numerator.

Every licence includes

  • Full 90-day PRC protocol per participant
  • 57 structured email inputs across three pillars
  • 14 Touch Point worksheets at scheduled intervals
  • PRC Index at Days 1, 30, 60, 90
  • Anonymity architecture enforced from Day 1
  • Aggregate cohort reporting quarterly
  • Seat activation within 48 hours of procurement
  • No IT integration required. Runs on email.
  • Direct access to Jon Cull
  • Disclosures and clinical off-ramp clearly defined
  • 12-month rolling contract on Standard and above. 90 days notice to cancel. Pilot is a one-off 90-day cohort.
Pilot
£2,950
one-off · up to 50
90-day cohort · no rolling contract
  • One-off 90-day paid cohort. No rolling contract.
  • Prove the ROI before scaling
  • Site-wide enrolment, up to 50, no seat cap
  • 57 structured inputs per participant
  • 14 Touch Point worksheets
  • Aggregate report at Day 90
  • Direct access to Jon
Book a Call
Standard
£39
per employee / year
from £2,950 / year · 51–250 staff
  • Site-wide enrolment, no seat cap
  • Unlimited 90-day cohorts in 12 months
  • Quarterly aggregate reporting
  • HR briefing document included
  • Direct access to Jon Cull
  • Rolling enrolment, new cohorts monthly
Contact Jon
Corporate
£24
per employee / year
from £9,750 / year · 251–1,000 staff
  • Everything in Standard
  • Monthly aggregate reporting
  • Board-level briefing available
  • Benefits broker integration
  • Priority direct access to Jon Cull
  • 12-month rolling term
Contact Jon
Enterprise
£24+
per employee / year · bespoke
from £24,000 / year · 1,000+ staff
  • Multi-site and international
  • Custom reporting cadence
  • Board-level briefing
  • Benefits broker integration
  • Priority direct access to Jon Cull
Contact Jon

Enterprise (1,000+ employees): bespoke pricing from £24/employee/year, minimum annual fee £24,000. Multi-site, international, or custom reporting cadence. Contact Jon to discuss.

The numbers in full

From April 2026, the financial case stops being about lost output and starts being about cash. The Employment Rights Act 2025 removes the three waiting days: Statutory Sick Pay is now payable from day one of every absence, short or long, at £123.25 a week. It lands on payroll whether the absence is one day or the full 28-week limit. There is no threshold to clear and nothing to dispute. A pattern that used to cost you invisibly now creates a direct, unavoidable payroll liability the moment it produces a single day off.

DWP puts the new cost to employers at roughly £13 per employee per year — about £3,300 across a 250-person workforce — before a single long-term case is counted. One long-term absence alone can reach more than £3,000 in SSP across the 28-week limit, before the cost of cover. Against hard numbers like these, the Standard licence at £9,750 is not a benefits-budget line. It is a cash offset: it works on the pattern before the pattern reaches payroll. DWP, Employment Rights Act 2025 Economic Analysis, January 2026

And that is before the invisible losses. The presenteeism figure below is on top of the cash liability above, not instead of it.

£10,500
Lost output · one £70k senior at 70% capacity for six months
PRC illustrative calculation · IPPR, 2024
=
£9,750
Annual licence cost · 250-employee organisation · Standard pricing £39/emp/yr
One restored senior more than covers the entire annual licence.

The average cost of replacing a professional employee is £30,614 (Oxford Economics and Unum, 2014 — the real cost today is higher). The risk of losing the person entirely is a separate calculation on top of the presenteeism figure above. Oxford Economics & Unum, “The Cost of Brain Drain,” 2014

What your EAP covers — and what it cannot

Your EAP budget is already committed, and it earns its place. For the 10%+ who will self-refer, it does exactly what it is designed to do: a confidential route to support, on demand. Nothing here argues against that spend.

The limit is structural, not financial. An EAP only reaches the people who put their hand up — and the population that will not, the senior professionals who have done the maths on a clinical record, is the same population whose absences now land on payroll from day one. Because the format cannot reach them, it cannot reduce that liability. This is not a cost problem with your EAP. It is a coverage problem: the 90% it structurally excludes is exactly the 90% carrying your new day-one SSP exposure. EAPA UK, Securing the Future of the EAP, 2024

PRC is priced per employee and delivered to every employee. There is no uptake step between the licence and the workforce, because nobody has to come forward to receive it. That is what lets it work on the liability the EAP cannot touch. Aggregate completion is reported to you at Day 90.

For a second reference point: a certified workplace first-aider course is published at £325 per person, capped at 16 people per course. At Standard pricing, the same £325 covers eight employees for a full year, site-wide, with no seat cap. MHFA England published pricing

Not ready to book a call? Read the Organisation Brief — covers the protocol, evidence base, financial case, and pricing.

Book a Call with Jon Read the Organisation Brief

Questions before you commit? Every objection answered here →

Want to see what the employer and participant receive at Day 90? Sample reports →

Also available My Leak. My Default. — a human-led keynote and workshop for targeted senior cohorts. A separate product with separate pricing. See the programme →
Sample reports

What the employer receives. What the participant receives.

At Day 90, two reports are generated automatically. The employer receives aggregate cohort data only. The participant receives their full 90-day record, sent directly to them. Neither report requires manual input.

For the HR Director

Cohort Performance Report

Seat occupancy, completion rate, aggregate PRC Index movement across all seven measures, indicative financial return, and EAP cost comparison. No names. No individual data. One document the HR Director can take to a board.

Download example →

Illustrative. Fictitious data.

For the participant

Your 90-Day Record

What they did across the three phases, their if/then construction, their three observable differences at Day 90, full PRC Index across all four measurement points, and a maintenance action. Sent directly to the participant only.

Download example →

Illustrative. Fictitious data.

Common questions

The EAP alternative — your questions answered

Is PRC Workforce an alternative to our EAP?

PRC sits alongside your existing EAP and Occupational Health provision — it does not replace either. It is the additional layer for the roughly 90% of the workforce who will not self-refer into a clinical or disclosed route. Procuring PRC requires no change to your current EAP or OH contract.

Is it genuinely anonymous?

Yes. Anonymity is architectural, not a policy promise. Participants enrol on a personal device using a personal email and are assigned a random seat ID. The employer has no route to a name, no list, and no report that resolves below the cohort.

What does the employer see?

Seat occupancy, completion rate, and aggregate PRC Index movement across the cohort, reported quarterly. No names, no individual scores, and nothing that can be cross-referenced against a personnel file.

Is PRC therapy or a clinical service?

No. PRC is a 90-day behavioural protocol delivered by structured email. It is not therapy, counselling, or clinical treatment. It does not diagnose or prescribe, and no clinical record is created.

How much does PRC Workforce cost?

Standard pricing is £39 per employee per year (51–250 staff), Corporate is £24 per employee per year (251–1,000 staff), and a one-off Pilot cohort of up to 50 people is £2,950. Licensing is site-wide with no seat cap.

Who is PRC Workforce for?

Senior professionals, mid-tier leaders, and high-functioning employees who carry significant load but will not put their name on a list to get support — the population an EAP structurally cannot reach.

Enquire

Book a call with Jon.

30 minutes. No obligation. Every first call goes to Jon personally. Not a sales team. Not a junior.

The call covers what you are currently spending on existing provision, what utilisation looks like in your workforce, and whether PRC is the right fit. If it is not, you will be told.

Book 30 minutes with Jon

Or call direct: +44 7493 087262

Not ready for a call?

The Organisation Brief covers the protocol, the evidence base, the privacy architecture, the financial case, and the disclosures. No call required. No follow-up unless you ask for one.

Read the Organisation Brief →

Send me the brief by email

Leave your email and Jon will send the brief directly. No follow-up call unless you ask for one.

Held by PRC Workforce only. UK GDPR. Privacy policy

Send a question

Your details are held by PRC Workforce only. Not shared with your organisation or any third party. Data held under UK GDPR. Privacy policy · Disclosures

Disclosures

PRC is a 90-day behavioural protocol delivered by structured email. It is not therapy, counselling, or any form of clinical treatment. It does not diagnose. It does not prescribe. It does not operate as a psychological service.

If a clinical concern surfaces during the protocol, the participant is directed to the appropriate clinical service. PRC holds the seat, applies no fee, and applies no restart penalty.

The PRC Index is a set of seven self-report measures rated 1 to 10. It is not independently validated as a clinical outcome measure. It tracks how the participant rates their own observable output across the 90-day period. Nothing more is claimed. PRC Workforce does not provide clinical advice. If you are concerned about your health or the health of a member of your workforce, consult a qualified clinician.

Read the full disclosures →

References