-1.png?width=600&height=450&name=Untitled%20design%20(8)-1.png)
Measuring workplace fertility support means tracking three outcome areas - retention, absence, and mental health - against a baseline set before the benefit launches. HR and benefits leaders who report on all three, rather than utilisation alone, can show a defensible ROI case at renewal and budget review. This guide sets out the KPIs, data sources, and reporting cadence to do it.
Why fertility support measurement matters now
Fertility benefits have moved from a nice-to-have to a mainstream part of UK employee benefits packages, with provision growing from around 6% of employers in 2019 to roughly 23% by 2025. That growth means budget holders are asking sharper questions about return on investment, and "people find it useful" is no longer a sufficient answer at renewal time.
The cost of getting this wrong is well documented. Around 38% of employees going through fertility treatment consider leaving their job, and separate research puts the annual cost of inadequate workplace fertility support to UK employers at roughly £217 million, with an average of £30,000 to replace a single employee. Meanwhile, only around 27% of UK employers currently have a formal fertility policy, and just 12% of employees say they have access to fertility-specific benefits at work - a gap most competitors haven't closed yet, which is exactly why measuring and reporting on impact matters: it's the evidence that turns a benefit from a line item into a retention strategy.
The three KPI categories to track
Fertility support impact shows up in three places: whether people stay, whether they're absent less, and whether their mental health outcomes improve.
Retention and turnover
Retention is the clearest business case for fertility support.
- Turnover rate: benefit users vs. non-users. Compare annual turnover among employees who've engaged with fertility support against the wider workforce turnover rate. This is the single most persuasive board-level metric.
- Return-to-work rate after treatment-related leave. What proportion of employees on fertility-related leave return to their previous role within an agreed window.
- Retention at 12 months post-treatment. Whether employees who used the benefit are still with the business a year after their treatment episode ended.
- Exit interview signal. The proportion of leavers citing lack of fertility or family-forming support as a factor, tracked over time.
Context worth citing internally: research suggests around 61% of employees who received employer-funded fertility coverage report feeling more loyal to that employer as a result, which is the mechanism behind the retention numbers above.
Absence rates
Fertility treatment involves frequent, often short-notice clinic appointments, and unsupported employees tend to take that time as unplanned sick leave rather than disclosed, planned absence. That distinction is the KPI.
- Planned vs. unplanned absence ratio for employees who have disclosed fertility treatment. A rising share of planned absence (booked appointment leave, flexible working) against falling unplanned sick leave is the target trend.
- Short-term sickness absence rate, tracked for the benefit-user cohort against the organisational baseline. Research indicates around 36% of employees undergoing fertility treatment report having to take increased sick leave where support wasn't in place - this is the number a well-used benefit should move.
- Bradford Factor delta (where used) for the benefit-user cohort, pre- and post-benefit launch.
Employee mental health outcomes
This is the hardest category to measure directly - and the one most likely to be under-reported, because fertility-related mental health strain frequently goes undisclosed. Use proxy and provider-level data rather than asking managers to assess it.
- EAP or provider counselling uptake among employees flagged as accessing fertility support, tracked as a percentage of the eligible cohort.
- Wellbeing pulse survey scores, segmented (anonymously, in line with GDPR and minimum-cohort-size rules) for teams with higher fertility benefit engagement.
- Self-reported distress or confidence indicators, where your provider captures these as part of the clinical pathway.
The scale of what's being measured here is significant: UK-specific research has found that 99% of employees undergoing fertility treatment say it affects their mental wellbeing, 63% sought professional counselling or psychological support during treatment, and 73% said the experience made them less productive at work. A support benefit that's working should show movement on the proxy metrics above, even where direct clinical data isn't available to HR for confidentiality reasons.
Building a quarterly fertility support reporting framework
| Metric | Data source | Frequency | What "good" looks like |
|---|---|---|---|
| Turnover: benefit users vs. organisational average | HRIS + provider utilisation report | Quarterly | Benefit-user turnover at or below org average |
| Return-to-work rate after treatment leave | HRIS | Quarterly | 90%+ within agreed return window |
| Planned vs. unplanned absence ratio (benefit users) | Absence management system | Quarterly | Planned share increasing over time |
| Short-term sickness absence rate (benefit users vs. baseline) | Absence management system | Quarterly | Trending toward or below baseline |
| Benefit provider / counselling uptake among eligible cohort | Provider report | Quarterly | Increasing uptake, decreasing average episode length |
| Wellbeing pulse score (segmented, anonymised) | Engagement survey platform | Bi-annual | Stable or improving vs. org average |
| Benefit awareness and utilisation rate | Provider report | Quarterly | Rising awareness; utilisation tracking toward at least the 12% national access baseline, then beyond it |
Common measurement pitfalls to avoid
Getting this wrong usually comes down to one of three mistakes.
Treating utilisation as impact. A high sign-up rate tells you people know the benefit exists - it doesn't tell you whether it changed a retention or absence outcome. Report utilisation as a leading indicator, never as the headline result.
Ignoring disclosure stigma in the data. More than 40% of employees going through fertility treatment don't disclose it to their employer, which means your benefit-user cohort will always undercount the true affected population. Frame reporting around the disclosed cohort explicitly, rather than implying it represents everyone who could benefit.
Reporting on cohorts too small to be meaningful - or too small to be anonymous. Fertility support cohorts are often small relative to headcount. Aggregate to a minimum reportable group size (commonly five or more) both for statistical reliability and for GDPR-compliant anonymity, and hold quarterly data until it clears that threshold rather than reporting partial figures.
A sample fertility support scorecard
Use this structure as a starting template for board or ExCo reporting:
| Outcome area | This quarter | Last quarter | Trend | Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benefit awareness | ||||
| Utilisation rate (eligible cohort) | ||||
| Turnover: benefit users vs. org average | ||||
| Return-to-work rate | ||||
| Short-term absence: benefit users vs. baseline | ||||
| Benefit/counselling uptake | ||||
| Wellbeing pulse score (segmented) |
Frequently Asked Questions
How do workplace fertility support services impact employee mental health? Workplace fertility support improves mental health outcomes by reducing the psychological distress caused by unsupported treatment. UK research shows 99% of employees undergoing fertility treatment report an effect on their mental wellbeing, and workplace policy and support have been directly linked to reduced psychological distress during treatment. Employers can track this indirectly through EAP and counselling uptake, segmented wellbeing survey scores, and provider-level engagement data, rather than relying on self-reported disclosure alone.
How do workplace fertility support services affect retention and absence rates? Workplace fertility support improves retention by addressing the main driver of attrition during treatment: roughly 38% of employees undergoing fertility treatment consider leaving their job, a figure that drops sharply where employer support exists. On absence, support shifts unplanned sick leave into planned, disclosed absence for appointments - research links inadequate support to a 36% increase in sick leave among affected employees. HR teams should track both as a comparison between benefit users and the organisational baseline, not as isolated figures.
What's a realistic benchmark for fertility benefit utilisation? Only around 12% of UK employees currently have access to fertility-specific benefits at all, so utilisation benchmarks are still emerging. A realistic first-year target is raising awareness to the point where utilisation begins tracking above that 12% national access baseline, with steady quarter-on-quarter growth in awareness preceding growth in uptake.
How often should HR report on fertility support impact? Quarterly for operational metrics (absence, utilisation, return-to-work), and bi-annually for wellbeing survey data, which needs a longer window to show a reliable trend. Annual reporting should consolidate all three KPI categories into a single retention and cost-avoidance narrative for renewal conversations.