Effective laboratory safety programs depend on consistent leadership, open communication, and systems that engage staff at every level. Lab Manager’s Leadership Excellence Awards recognize professionals who demonstrate this kind of impact, and the Excellence in Lab Safety award honors leaders who embed safety as a shared responsibility rather than a compliance exercise.
The 2026 recipient, Dan Scungio—often known in the industry as Dan the Lab Safety Man—serves as laboratory safety officer for Sentara Health, a healthcare system spanning 12 hospitals. Through initiatives such as the organization’s Lab Safety Coach Program, which convenes dozens of safety champions each month to review incidents, analyze real-world hazards, and share prevention strategies, Scungio has helped strengthen engagement and accountability around safety. In this Q&A, he discusses the practices and mindset that help laboratories turn safety from policy into culture.
What does receiving a 2026 Lab Manager Leadership Excellence Award mean to you at this point in your career?
At this point in my career, this award feels less like a finish line and more like validation that the safety message is resonating. For years, I’ve said that safety isn’t serendipity—it’s science. Safety and science are intentional, measurable, and led by professionals.
What means the most to me is that this award reflects impact beyond a single lab. I’ve worked with hundreds of laboratories—hospital labs, public health labs, veterinary labs, academic labs—and the common denominator in the best-performing ones is strong leadership commitment. If this award represents anything, I hope it represents the idea that safety leadership is true lab leadership.
I’m also grateful because I didn’t build this message alone. Every lab professional who chose to improve, who fixed a hazard, who spoke up, who changed a process—they’re part of this recognition as well.
What are the earliest signs that a lab’s safety culture is improving, or eroding?
When the lab safety culture is improving, you tend to hear more questions. Not complaints—questions. “Is this the safest way to do this?” “Should we reassess this risk?” “Can we move this sharps container?” People begin to notice things before they become incidents. That’s what you should be looking for.
You also see peer accountability emerge in an improving culture. Staff remind each other about PPE. They fix small hazards without waiting to be told. Near-miss reporting increases—not because the lab is getting more dangerous, but because it’s getting more transparent.
When the safety culture is eroding, the signs are more subtle. PPE compliance slips “just this once.” Hazards sit unnoticed and unaddressed. Near-miss reporting drops, and leaders stop talking about safety except during inspections. The phrase “We’ve always done it this way” starts to show up more often. Complacency in safety is quiet, so we always need to be on the lookout for it.
You developed the Lab Safety Coach Program, which draws strong attendance. What makes it work?
The program works because it’s not just a lecture series. It’s a safety leadership development model for all staff. The Lab Safety Coach Program focuses on behaviors, influence, and accountability—not just regulations. Most safety training teaches people what OSHA requires. Our Safety Coach Program teaches them how to lead people toward safer behavior while being seen as the safety resource in their department.
We also talk about psychological safety. We practice difficult conversations, role-playing how to address repeat noncompliance without damaging relationships. We focus on practical tools—how to conduct meaningful audits, how to use data to drive action, and how to close the gap between written policy and daily behavior.
The program also works because it’s interactive. People bring real issues from their labs and we workshop them together. There’s vulnerability in that, and that vulnerability builds trust. Finally, it works because participants leave with confidence. They stop seeing themselves as “the safety person” and start seeing themselves as safety leaders.
What continues to motivate your commitment to lab safety?
Two things motivate me: a real concern for people and the science of preventability.
I’ve seen many injuries that never had to happen, and exposures that were entirely predictable. When you understand that nearly every serious lab incident has warning signs beforehand, you can’t ignore that responsibility.
But what truly motivates me is watching transformation. I’ve helped labs move from a reactive culture to a proactive one. I’ve seen leaders who once avoided safety conversations become champions for accountability, and I’ve been able to watch cultures shift.
Safety is measurable. Audit scores improve. Injury rates decline. Training completion increases. But what excites me most is when someone says, “We don’t cut corners anymore.” That’s culture. And culture saves careers—and sometimes lives.
What are the first three actions a lab manager should take to strengthen safety culture?
First, model the behavior you expect. If a leader ignores PPE or other safety regulations while in the department, so will the team. If a leader addresses hazards immediately, the team will follow. Culture mirrors leadership.
Second, make safety visible and measurable. Track audit scores. Review near-miss trends. Discuss safety metrics in staff meetings just as you would quality or productivity metrics. What gets measured—and discussed—gets managed.
Third, create accountability without fear. That means clear expectations, consistent follow-up, and respectful correction. It also means recognizing good safety behaviors. Culture improves when people know what right looks like. Safety culture doesn’t improve through slogans. It improves through consistent leadership behaviors repeated over time.












