FROID NR-1 · Readiness
A good scope avoids contracting breakdowns that cannot be disclosed, or expecting from a questionnaire what requires technical assessment.
Tick the boxes to organize your reading. The selections are neither sent nor stored; this is not a legal diagnosis or an eligibility calculation.
Two questions and the calculation is done right here, in your browser. If the answer is no, it is better to know now — and there is a different path for that case.
The result only appears when there are enough respondents in the breakdown. It is not a technical limitation: it is the guarantee of anonymity. In a group of six people, knowing the average is already almost knowing who answered what — and a worker who suspects this answers what is safe, not what is true. Then the company pays for a picture that does not match reality.
For the same reason, nothing is released while collection is open. Seeing the dashboard with 30 answers and then with 31 would reveal the answer of the thirty-first person.
There is a second floor, of a different nature. The first protects anonymity: a cohort too small allows deducing who answered what. The second protects representativeness: a company of 3,000 people with 50 answers preserves anonymity perfectly and would still produce an inventory covering 1.7% of the workforce. The required number is not our choice — it is the sample size for a proportion with finite population correction, at 95% confidence and a 5-point margin, which enters the criteria document as a verifiable justification. When the required sample exceeds 80% of the group, it stops saving answers and becomes a census: that is what happens below 98 people.
Exemption from preparing the PGR depends on the conditions of NR-1, not only on the size of the company. Check your classification with the person responsible for occupational safety and health. The AEP flow in FROID is independent of the release of the questionnaire result. Official MTE guidance.
How to think about aggregated disclosure · See the complete process, step by step
The size of a group is not enough to conclude representativeness or to authorise disclosure. The protection floor and the criteria for a conclusive assessment must be confirmed against the current version of the product before the campaign.
The calculator above estimates release using the current floors mirrored from the server; the actual release is decided in the database, with the real data. A readiness analysis must consider headcount, participation, breakdowns and confirmed technical rules.
The limitation must be documented and discussed with those responsible. Do not merge groups merely to get around the protection, nor conclude that the absence of a report is equivalent to the absence of risk.
