Nothing to install, nothing to approve
It runs in a browser. No app store, no MDM profile, no device enrolment, no IT ticket. Workers open a link on the phone they already carry, including personal phones you do not manage.
For employers
Your roster is a fatigue exposure. Here is roughly how big.
Shift workers carry insomnia at four to six times the rate of the general population, and it shows up on your books as absence, reduced output, and healthcare spend. The calculator below sizes that using published figures and shows its arithmetic. It does not tell you we fix it, because nobody has measured that.
120
Likely affected
35
at 29% prevalence
Lost productivity
$122,009
per year
Excess healthcare
$77,395
per year
Show the arithmetic ↓
120 shift workers × 29% = 35 likely to meet the criteria for insomnia. Prevalence among shift workers runs 29% to 38%, against roughly 6% in the general population. We use the bottom of that range.
Each of them costs an employer $976 a year in absenteeism and $2,530 in presenteeism, which is reduced output while still at work. A further $2,224 goes to treating conditions the sleep problem makes worse.
Cost figures: National Safety Council →Prevalence: StatPearls, Shift Work Hazards →
This is your exposure, not a saving. We make no claim about how much of it ShiftDawn removes, because nobody has measured that, including us. Anyone quoting you a percentage here is guessing.
29–38%
insomnia prevalence among shift workers, against about 6% generally
StatPearls, Shift Work Hazards →The other frame: keeping people
The arithmetic above is productivity and healthcare cost, because that is what the published figures support. It is not the argument that has actually moved a budget.
In Palm Beach County, Florida, IAFF Local 2928 is moving from a 24/48 shift to a 24/72. The county approved a three-year contract that hires 148 new fire fighters to make the schedule possible, and the new shift starts in January 2027. A Brigham and Women’s Hospital team is working to secure funding to follow the change.
“We wanted to make the switch to offset the fatigue our members were feeling on the current schedule and to improve recruitment and retention.”Brad Lavar, Local 2928, quoted by the IAFF
Fatigue was the reason. Recruitment and retention was the justification that carried a county commission. If you are building a case internally, that is worth knowing, because a safety argument and a staffing argument go to different budgets.
IAFF, Feeling sleep deprived? Help is on the horizon~40%
of fire fighters in a national sample had at least one sleep disorder: insomnia, shift work disorder, or sleep apnea
Barger et al., 2015, Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, via IAFF →197
fire fighters tracked with wearables in a Yale study finding that sleep interruption differed by apparatus assignment
Mike Binney, West Metro Local 1309, via IAFF →If you run a hospital
Nursing is the one vertical with a current, traceable turnover cost. NSI Nursing Solutions surveys acute care hospitals annually. Their 2026 report covers 527 hospitals across forty states, 965,886 healthcare workers and 262,405 registered nurses.
$60,090
hospitals’ average reported cost of turnover for one staff RN
17.6%
national RN turnover. 14.6% at hospitals counting only full and part-time separations
$295,000
per percentage point of RN turnover, per year, at the average hospital. Modelled, not measured
Three things to know before you repeat these. NSI is a nurse recruitment and staffing firm, not a neutral research body, and the same document contains a sales pitch; the figure is the industry standard and it is a vendor’s. The $60,090 is self-reported by hospitals, and NSI notes that only 46.1% of respondents track the metric at all. And the $295,000 is arithmetic on top of that average, not an independently measured number.
NSI National Health Care Retention & RN Staffing Report, 2026 editionFor policing and fire, we have no cost figure and will not invent one. The six-figure cost-per-officer number in wide circulation traces back to an uncited assertion in a 2016 opinion post. The Police Executive Research Forum’s own workforce reporting contains no per-officer replacement cost at all. If someone quotes you one, ask them for the study.
For trucking, the American Trucking Associations last published truckload turnover at 92% annualised for fleets over $30m revenue, and that was Q4 2020. ATA has since published a correction warning that the metric measures drivers moving between carriers, not leaving the industry. It is a carrier-level churn number and should only be used as one.
Why this one gets used
Fatigue programmes usually fail at distribution, not at content. A PDF in an intranet folder and an app nobody installs both end at the same place.
No personal data to review
The schedule is calculated on the worker's own device. No account, no sign-up, no roster upload, nothing transmitted to us. There is no data processing agreement to negotiate because there is no data.
Every rule is published with its source
The methodology page lists all eight rules the calculator applies, the research behind each, and the two constants that are our judgement rather than the literature's. Those two are flagged in amber rather than buried.
Tested against 15,176 rosters
The engine is property-tested on every change across every start hour, shift lengths from four to twenty-four hours, all roster types, all chronotypes, and commutes up to three hours. That test caught a real defect before it shipped.
Per seat, per year, published
Every other vendor in this category hides pricing behind a sales call. At 100 workers on the Department tier the annual cost is $1,200, against a calculated exposure near $100,000. You can do that division without us on the phone.
Team
$18
per seat / year
10 to 49 seats
Department
$12
per seat / year
50 to 249 seats
Site
$8
per seat / year
250 to 999 seats
1,000 seats or more, or a roster that does not fit these shapes: dlomonaco2008@gmail.com. No trial on these tiers, because a purchase order is not a countdown.
If you are already under a fatigue rule
Some of these oblige you to do something. Most do not, and we would rather say which is which than let you assume.
FRA 49 CFR 270 Subpart E →
Binding
Class I railroads, Amtrak and commuter operators must build and submit a Fatigue Risk Management Program covering scheduling practices and consecutive off-duty hours, review it annually, and pass FRA audit. Effective July 2022.
FMCSA Hours of Service →
Binding
11-hour driving limit inside a 14-hour window after 10 hours off, ELD-enforced. FMCSA is currently piloting Flexible Sleeper Berth and Split Duty Period, which is where split sleep starts to matter.
EU Working Time Directive →
Binding
Eleven consecutive hours rest per 24, a 48-hour average week, night workers averaging no more than 8 hours per 24, and a free health assessment for night workers before assignment and at intervals.
UK HSE, human factors →
Binding
HSE is explicit that meeting the Working Time Regulations alone is not enough. Employers must risk-assess fatigue, hold a policy limiting hours and shift-swapping, monitor hours actually worked, and consult staff on shift design.
OSHA, worker fatigue →
Guidance only
There is no OSHA fatigue standard. The page recommends education and fatigue management programmes. The NIOSH nurse work-hour training it links to is a resource, not required training.
ShiftDawn does not make you compliant with any of these. It is not a compliance control, it does not produce your programme documentation, and it does not record hours worked. It is one thing an individual worker can use. Anyone selling you compliance from a sleep tool is overselling it.
What we will not tell you
- That we reduce incidents, absence, healthcare cost, or turnover by any percentage.
- That any customer uses this. We are new and we have none to name.
- That we are cheaper than a named competitor, since not one of them publishes a price.
- That this treats, diagnoses, or prevents anything. It is a scheduling and education tool.
- That we make you compliant with any fatigue regulation. We do not.
If a vendor hands you a saving percentage for a fatigue tool, ask which trial produced it. The honest answer in this category is usually that none did.