Everywhen’s publication dated 14 April 2026 reports that 43% of UK companies do not have a formal health and wellbeing strategy. The finding concerns employers’ reported approach to strategy. It does not measure diagnosed illness, employee access to treatment or the effectiveness of a particular benefit.

The publisher’s indexed announcement was available for this review, but the complete publication and its methodology were not retrieved. The figure should therefore remain attributed to Everywhen, without adding unverified sample details, fieldwork dates or comparisons between groups. It is a prompt for an organisation’s own review, rather than a basis for assuming that its employees have the same needs.

Turn provision into an explicit purpose This editor recommends asking what the organisation intends its health and wellbeing programme to achieve. A list of services can describe provision while leaving the purpose, ownership and expected evidence unclear. A strategy review should connect each objective with the practical support available to employees.

The business can examine whether responsibilities are understood across HR, local teams and external providers. It should also consider how the programme changes when the workforce, locations or needs change. A document described as a strategy is useful only if it supports decisions and remains consistent with the services delivered.

Review access and communication Employees need to understand which support applies to them and how to use it. The organisation should examine communications from the employee’s perspective, including eligibility, language and the route to assistance. The existence of a benefit does not by itself demonstrate that people can navigate the process.

Programme information can help the review, provided its limits are visible. Low recorded use may have several explanations and should not automatically lead to removal of a service. Similarly, higher use cannot on its own establish better health or financial returns.

Give governance a practical role The employer can report separately on objectives, available services, access and evidence about outcomes. That separation makes it easier for decision makers to understand what supports a conclusion and where further information is needed.

Everywhen’s finding differs from a survey of employers’ mental-health priorities: a stated concern and a formal strategy answer different questions. Benefits teams should use the distinction to assess whether their own priorities are translated into usable support, clear accountability and a process for reviewing what the programme delivers.

Sources: Source consultée