Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08212012 - SD.4RECOMMENDATION(S): APPROVE response to 2011/12 Civil Grand Jury Report No. 1214 entitled, "Employee Evaluation and Recognition - Time to Stop Talking and Take Action" and DIRECT the Clerk to the Board to send the response to the Superior Court no later than September 7, 2012. FISCAL IMPACT: None. This is an informational report. BACKGROUND: On June 12, 2012, the County received 2011/12 Civil Grand Jury Report No. 1214 entitled, "Employee Evaluation and Recognition - Time to Stop Talking and Take Action", attached, which was filed on June 5, 2012. Penal Code section 933 provides for final grand jury reports at any time during the grand jury’s term and requires the governing body of any agency whose operations are the subject of a report to comment on the grand jury's findings and recommendations APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 08/21/2012 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes: VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: JULIE ENEA (925) 335-1077 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: August 21, 2012 David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: SD. 4 To:Board of Supervisors From:David Twa, County Administrator Date:August 21, 2012 Contra Costa County Subject:RESPONSE TO 2011/12 CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 1214 ENTITLED "EMPLOYEE EVALUATION AND RECOGNITION" BACKGROUND: (CONT'D) to the presiding judge of the superior court within 90 days from the date the governing body receives the report, making the Board's response deadline for Report No. 1214 on September 10, 2012. The Board of Supervisors referred Report 1214 to the County Administrator with instruction to return to the Board not later than August 21 with a draft response for the Board's consideration. ATTACHMENTS 2011-12 Civil Grand Jury Report 1214 Employee Evaluation and Recognition County Response to 2011-12 Civil Grand Jury Report 1214 Employee Evaluation and Recognition A REPORT BY TH E 201 1 ·2012 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY 725 Court S tree t Martin ez, Californ ia 94553 Repo rl1214 Emp loyee Evaluation and Recognition Time to Stop Talking and Take Action A PPROVED BY TH E G RAND J URY: Date :May 3 1,20 12 ACCEPTED FOR FILI NG : Date :r;M~~T~J HN T .LAETTN ER J UDGE OF T HE SUPER IOR CO URT Contact: Lloyd Bell Forepcrson 925 -957-5638 Contra Costa Co u nty G rand Jur y R eport 1214 Employee Evaluation and Recognition Time to Stop Talking and Take Action TO:Hoard of S upervisors C ounty Ad ministrato r SUMM ARY Co ntra Co sta Co unty (County)is faced with difficult c hallenges .For th e past four years, revenue avai lable to fund Co unty o perations has bee n decreasing .A t the same t ime. the need fo r program s a nd serv ice s to s upport its resi dents has bee n increasing.The Co unty need s to imple ment practices that will res ult in more effici ent ways to co nduct b usiness and p rovide s erv ices to residents . Greater e fficiency can be achieved a nd s us tained through a co llective co mmitment to pe rfo rmance i mprovement.Innovat ive ways to impro ve q uality and productivity can he ide ntified,dev eloped,and implemented .For this to happen, e mployees mu st ga in a n un derstanding of w hat needs to be acco mplished and how p rogre s s will be meas ured .Th ey are respons ib le fo r co ntributing their s kills a nd know ledge to ac hievi ng go als and o bjectives. Fina lly,there mu st be an effec tive and accepted way to eva luate and recognize individua l performance. Th e de si red outcome,improved ope rat io nal effi ciency.can not be achieved wi thout the su pport o f the em plo yees.A n effective eva luation and recogn ition program is ess ential in o rder to get th is s upport and has bee n identified as a "bes t practi ce" in o rg anizations s ee kin g to ac hieve o ptimal performance.The State o f Ca li fomia (State)is in the process of deve loping an d implem enting an eva luation and recognition program fo r its employees . Three previous G rand Jury re port s have mentioned e mployee per formance management in the County .In all cases.th o se reports o nly indicated t hat an e mployee performance man agement prog ram was a best practice an d d id no t discus s o r develop w hat th at prog ram could be in th e County .Thi s report foc uses o n d efin ing w hat that prog ram co uld be an d recommends that the nece ssary ste ps be taken to dev elop and impl ement an Employee Performance Eva luation Program throughout the Co unty . BACKGROUND The Co unty is faced w ith di fficult c hallenge s.Fo r t he past four yea rs.revenue ava ilable to fund County operations ha s bee n decreasing.A t the same t ime.the need for prog rams and serv ice s to s upport its re s idents h as been increasing . T he Gran d J ury reviewed published reports that de sc ribe w hat co mprise s an e mployee Contra Costa County Gra nd Ju ry Report 1214 Grand J ur}'Repo rts ~posted at hu p "flwww CC-i:ouns prlllgrandjyn Page 1 pe rformance evaluation program and so me of the benefits reali zed a fter implementation. C urrent prac tice in thi s ar ea w as e xam i ned in se veral County departme nts.Examples of private s ector o rganization s a nd publ ic s ector a gencies undertak ing s imilar i nitiative s we re identified . Components of a "Best Practice"Model In 2007,re cogni zing the challen ges it faced i n conducting it s o perations more effi ciently an d th e role e mp loyees pla y in do ing so ,th e S tate initiated a Human Re sou r ces M oderni zation Project. Part o f th e proj ect included devel opment ofa new management tool ,the E mpl oyee Performance M anagem ent Cy cle .Thi s tool was adapted from recommended pra ctices pro vided by t he U.S. Office of Per sonnel Management.The project e nded in June 20 11 ,b ut its goals a nd o bjectiv es continue to be pu rsued by the newl y formed Ca lifornia Department of Human Re so urce s . i ncluding impl ementation of thi s new tool . Th e foll owing i nformation re gardi ng t he ne w management tool was taken from th e S tate De partment o f Pe rsonnel Admini strat ion we bsite: Emp loyee Performance Manage ment Cycle -: Recognizing successful performance Planning work,s etting expectations E mployee Performance Observing Individual Performance Evaluating performance Developing the capacity to perform The five key processes in emp loyee pe rformance ma nagement ar e: I .Plannin g work and sett ing expectations 2 .Ob serving individual per formance 3 .Developing the c apac ity to perform 4 .Evalua t ing pcr fonnancc 5 .Reco gnizi ng s ucc essful per form ance Cont r a Costa County Gra nd [u ry Report 1214 (,rand Jill)'g epons ere posted at btUl :ll\\"""w cc-collTtS,O!2I 2fandilill' Page 2 Planning work a nd setting ex pe ctations: Planning wo rk m eans de ciding wh at work wi ll be assign ed to statTand en suring that a ll work s upports o rganizationa l goals .Setting performance e xpectation s informs s taff of w hat is required for s uccessfu l work performance.Involv ing emplo yees in the pla nn ing pro cess help s them u nderstand how their wo rk con tribu tes to the goa ls o f the organ ization . C lear performance expec tations : •i ncrea se e mployee u nder standin g of pe rformance criteria •provide a feedb ack com munication tool • focus o n per forman ce results Observ ing indiv idual performance: Obs erving individual performance mean s o bserving employee s in action,reviewin g work pro ducts ,and providing on going feedba ck focusing on perform ance.On going observation prov ides an o pportunity to : •c heck i f employees are meeting performance e xpectat ion s •c hange unre alistic expectations • recognize a chievements a long the w ay •addres s gaps in knowledge o r skills •address p roblematic performance Developi ng the capacity to perform: De vel oping the ca pacity to perform means providing o ngoing feedback ,buildin g on strengths, an d provid ing g rowth opportuniti es to strengthe n job-related s kills a nd compet encies. Results-oriented de velop mental strategie s may include : •fo rmal trainin g •o n -the-job t raining • mentoring •coa ching •rotat iona l assignments •job s had ow ing • j ob aid s Evaluating perfo rmance : E valuating p erformance is an o ngoing pro cess.Documented,formalized performance eval uations include performance expectat ion s,managerial observations,and performance o bjectives, identifying g rowth opportunit ies and s uccesses. Emp loyee ev a luation s should be co nducted at least a nnually a nd there s hould be no s urpr ises. Per forman ce evaluati ons are to be : • pro vided to pro bationary empl oyees on a tim ely basi s •pr ovided a t least annually a fter employees ha ve pas sed their probationary period Cont ra Costa County Gra nd Ju ry Report 1214 G rand Jury Reports are posted at hllDJI_Wc c-wurts,on;{grandi\lO' Page 3 • con sistent with the goals and expectations d iscussed with the empl oyee •objective • directl y linked to job requirements Recognizing successful performance: Mana gers s hould recognize employees for their performance .In addition ,they shou ld acknowledge employee contributions to the organizat ion 's mis sion .Recog nition can be formal or informal and, as with providi ng feedback ,it should be ongoing.It can be as s imp le as sa ying "th ank you" or writing a letter of appreciation . "Recognition is so easy to do and so inexpensive to di stribute that there is s imply no excuse for not doing it." -Rosabeth Moss Kamer Inexpensive ways to recogni ze individual performance: •c reate s uccess ceremonies • provide recognition cert ificate s •g ive o ut recognition letters • create "behind the s cenes recognition certificates"for tho se not usually in the li mel ight who were key to the s uccess of a project or initiative •coo rdinate a "thank you"ca ll from the Director Current Co unty Practices There is a long-standing po licy in the County requiri ng that all employee s receive an nual performance evaluations.The Grand Jury identified examples of employees who were not a ware o f any performance evaluation pro gram being in p lace.Evaluat ion s often did not include any feedback regarding the quality of their performance .In addition,there were employees w ho had not receiv ed a nnual performance evaluati ons,in some case s for years . Employees e xpressed intere st in measuring t heir level of achievement relative to the goa ls that had been established for them and wanted to receive recognition if they were doing a good job. Th ey expressed a ppreciat ion that previous rev iew s had recogn ized thei r effo rts. The Grand Ju ry ident ified a few County departments in which a perform ance evaluati on progr am had been independently dev e loped and implemented .An examp le is the Clerk- Rec order/Elections Department,where a performance management proce ss was put in place a number of years ago .It provide s tracking of expectat ions for cach emp loyee,including adherence to clear goal s aimed at improving the effic iency wit h which the Department's work is d one .Thi s Department has been recognized by outside e ntitie s for their operational resu lts a nd implementat ion of proce ss improvements. Elsewhere in the County ,so me man agers wanted to improve th e performance management pro grams in their workgroups . T hey con side red a nnual evalu ations and employee recognition very impo rtant.In the ab sence o f g uidance from the Co unty, they found wa ys on their own , s uch a s usi ng tool s that o ther dep artments had a lready installed o r tra ining the ir sta ll'in way s to Contra Costa County Gra nd [ury Report 1214 Grand Jury Reports are pos ted at hUD Rwww.cc-s:ourts.orgI erandiUf) Page 4 impr ove performance . Absent from di scussions of emp loyee performance eva luation practice s wit h some County managers is an y ment ion of how acc omplishments are recogn ized o r how de s ired perform ance will be encouraged.Some of those managers que stion the benefit associated with se tting goals an d evaluating performance because o f an inability to g ive bo nuses o r raise s di rectly tied to individual co ntributions made in ac hievement of goal s.As ci ted in the State's plan ,thi s is not the o nly t ype o f encouragemen t for good pe rformance .Many s tudies have pointed out that recognition is more effective in enco uraging to p performance than financia l incentives .In re viewing current practice s wi th manager s and employees of variou s C ounty departments,there was no ackn owledgment of a po licy or process a vailab le to recognize exceptional contribut ion s made by indi viduals. Even tho ugh there are some County departments that have. o n their 0 \0\111 initiative,deve loped and implemented some fo nn of employee performance evaluation program,awarene ss of th ose effo rts and ex periences b y other departments was virtually non-ex isten t.Eve n if those departments wanted to s hare th is type of information with others, a central po int for acc umulating and di stributing this information within the Co unty cou ld not be identified . Past G rand JU ry Recommendations Thr ee earlier G rand Ju ry Report s have mentioned the perfo rmance eva luation issue within the Co unty. Report s from 1994 a nd 2002 were s pec ifica lly targeted to performan ce eva luations for department heads.A 200 7 report focused o n bes t prac tice s for the County and o ne of the three best practices recommended was to conduct person nel pe rformance evaluati ons for all Co unty em ployees, not just departm ent head s .In res pons e to the se report s,the Board of S upervisors s tated general a greement with t he princ iple that performan ce eva luat ions s hould be done for all Co unty employees . FIN DINGS I .Th e Co unty has not fo llowed the recomm endations o f prev iou s Grand Jurie s and its own po licy that a ll employees s hould receive an annual performance evaluat ion . 2.Evaluations that do not include feedba ck regarding the quality of performance are not useful to emp loyees. 3 .The performance evaluation proce ss already in place in the C lerk-Recorder/E lect ions Department co uld provide lessons and guidan ce as to what practices are effecti ve. 4 .Co ntrary to th e beli efs held by so me County managers,num erous method s ex ist to recogni ze and thereby motivate emp loyees as ide fro m monetary remunera tio n. 5 .Because there is no proce ss for sha ring performance management initiative s a nd experience s betwee n department s,the Co unty may not be getting the benefit s of lessons learned . 6 .The Co unty can use t he State's Employee Performance Management Cycle as a model for a performance eva luation program . Cont ra Costa County Grand Jury Report 1214 Gru nd Jury RCplllts are poste d 8t ~lJO: Page S RECOMMENDATIONS 1.The Board of Superv iso r s sh o uld take all s teps neces sary to ens ure th at Co unty e mployee s are rec e iving annual performance rev iews,per c urrent po licy. 2.The Board of S upervisors s ho uld dire ct th at th ese reviews be based upon the five key proce sses identified in the Sta te 's E mployee Performance M anagement Cy cle . 3.The Boa rd of S uperviso r s sh ould as s ign responsi bility for tracki ng an nual p erformance rev iew s. REQUIRED RESPONSES Board of Supervisors County Admini stra tor Findings 1-6 1-6 Recommendations 1-3 Co py fo r Information Only -No Response Required Ag riculture /Wei ght s &Meas ures Department Anima l Servi ces Department Assesso r 's Office Auditor-Co ntroller 's O ffice Department of C hild S upport Serv ices C le rk-Reco rde r/Elect io ns De partment Co nservat io n &Devel opment D epartment County C ounsel's O ffice O ffice of th e Dis trict A ttorney Empl oyment &Hum an S ervice s D epartment Ge neral Services Department Health Services Department H uman Re sources Dep artment Department of Info rmatio n Techn o logy Library Probat ion Depart ment Pub lic Defe nder's O ffice S her iIT's Offi ce Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office Con t ra Costa Cou n ty Grand Jury Report 1214 Grand Ju ry Re ports are posted at htt p '/l",,,,w cc-courts orglg randjury Page 6 FINDINGS 1. The County has not followed the recommendations of previous Grand Juries and its own policy that all employees should receive an annual performance evaluation. Response: Partially disagree. The majority of County departments are conducting annual employee performance evaluations for most employees. Regular and formal review of employee performance continues to be a goal but has been hindered by staff reductions, rotations, and reassignment through layoff and countywide reorganization. 2. Evaluations that do not include feedback regarding the quality of performance are not useful to employees. Response: Partially disagree. Evaluations are more effective when they include feedback regarding the quality of an employee’s performance. However, an evaluation that simply verifies job expectations and associates those expectations with a department’s mission can also be useful to employees. 3. The performance evaluation process already in place in the Clerk-Recorder/Elections Department could provide lessons and guidance as to what practices are effective. Response: Agree. Several County departments are operating effective performance evaluation programs that can serve as models to other County departments and local agencies. 4. Contrary to the beliefs held by some County managers, numerous methods exist to recognize and thereby motivate employees aside from monetary remuneration. Response: Agree. County departments currently utilize a variety of no or low cost methods to recognize excellence including letters of commendation, a congratulatory mention in a department newsletter or intranet site, public recognition at a staff meeting, certificates and small awards such as a gift card for a cup of gourmet coffee. 5. Because there is no process for sharing performance management initiatives and experiences between departments, the County may not be getting the benefits of lessons learned. Response: Partially disagree. While there is not an interdepartmental sharing process specific to employee performance management, there are existing forums for networking across departments on any topic of interest, e.g. monthly department head meetings, countywide employment practices training (through the Risk Management Division of the County Administrator). As the County provides the public a heterogeneous array of programs and services, management best practices do not always translate successfully across County departments. Consequently, department heads are delegated the responsibility to develop their own best management practices as influenced by professional organizations that are specific to the type of business operated by the department. All County department heads and many management employees are active members of professional organizations that network on a variety of management topics. 6. The County can use the State's Employee Performance Management Cycle as a model for a performance evaluation program. Response: Agree. It is possible for the County to use the State's Employee Performance Management Cycle as a model for a performance evaluation program. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Board of Supervisors should take all steps necessary to ensure that County employees are receiving annual performance reviews, per current policy. Response: Has been implemented. The Board of Supervisors has committed to a policy of annual employee performance reviews and has authorized the County Administrator to oversee the policy through the annual performance review of department heads. Department heads have been granted authority and responsibility to conduct employee performance evaluation programs and the County provides training for first-line supervisors that covers performance management. 2. The Board of Supervisors should direct that these reviews be based upon the five key processes identified in the State's Employee Performance Management Cycle. Response: Has been implemented. The employee performance evaluation forms used by County departments substantially address each of the five performance management elements identified in the State's Employee Performance Management Cycle (planning and setting expectations, observing individual performance, developing the capacity to perform, evaluating performance, and recognizing successful performance). Within 90 days, we will verify the County’s conformance to these elements and bring any deficient practices into accord with the five elements. 3. The Board of Supervisors should assign responsibility for tracking annual performance reviews. Response: Has been implemented. Responsibility for tracking annual performance reviews was delegated to County department heads, under the oversight of the County Administrator.