Happy Holidays & Update!

I want to wish everyone a happy holiday season and wishes for a great 2014!

This post will provide a recap of the Supporting All Employees – Classified Advisory Committee Meeting that was held on December 10, 2013.  My previous post provides a link to the agenda and presentation, but you can find them again here – agenda and presentation.

The majority of the meeting was spent discussing the pilot of the Classified Growth & Development Cycle (CGDC), or new classified performance evaluation process.  I provided a timeline, which you can find here, in order to show when various parts of the cycle are to be completed.  While the timeline is already somewhat compressed for the year, I am being flexible with deadlines.  I realize that people are busy and the process can seem cumbersome the first time through.

Slide 3 of the presentation includes a breakdown of the participants in the pilot.  While this does not reflect the makeup of the initial proposal, it comes close and does include quite a number of employees from school sites.  We are actually finding that Principals supervising classified employees are fairly willing to participate in the process.  This is despite the fact that they are also evaluating about half of the teachers at their site.  The reasons for this probably include comfort with an expanded process that adds more value to the employee due to what they are seeing with the new teacher evaluations, and the fact that the classified employee does a majority of the work in the CGDC process, which is unlike what they are experiencing with the new teacher evaluations.

The supervisors of the pilot participants were invited to a half-day training session in October to explain the process and how they can initiate the work.  This training was not mandatory, and about half of the supervisors attended a session.  We plan to have a second half-day session early in 2014.  Employee participants did not receive specific training, but a variety of online resources were made available to them describing the various steps in the process.  Additionally, there are also online resources for the supervisors.  These can be found at:  http://classifiedtraining.lausd.net/employee_resources/jit/educator_growth_development_cycle_egdc.

I also presented a list of some of the feedback that we will capture as part of the pilot.  We plan to survey participants and their supervisors two to three times throughout the year.  The list, found here, includes data that we can capture on the back end of the evaluation tools as well as information that we can obtain through a survey.  The first survey will be sent out early in 2014.

In order to maintain some consistency with the growth and development cycles that we are using for teachers and school leaders, we are considering ways in which to capture stakeholder feedback.  At the meeting, I presented a list of the components that we have included in the CGDC, and highlighted those which seemed to lend themselves to ratings by stakeholders – customers, peers, subordinates, etc.  You can find that list of components here, and I have also included the Classified Performance Framework, which further defines the components and may be helpful, here. I drafted a very preliminary survey for the Advisory Committee to react to.  No decisions were made at the meeting, except to agree that I would come back with information captured from more extensive research on 360 degree feedback.  The types of questions, the rating scales, how to determine the relevant stakeholders, and how to present the resulting data were all discussed at the meeting.

I then discussed a new committee that we gathered to address the CGDC.  A Strategic Working Group (SWG) was created to consider a 5-year plan for the CGDC.  The SWG has met once so far and will meet on a fairly regular basis to discuss a variety of issues related to the CGDC work, and develop a plan to continue this work.  A general list of the issues that the SWG considered is listed in the presentation.

Finally, in order to keep the Advisory Committee informed about the progress of the pilot and results of feedback surveys, etc., we will be meeting on a quarterly basis.  Our next meeting will be in March 2014.  At that time, we will discuss some additional options for stakeholder feedback, and we should have some results from the surveys of pilot participants and their supervisors, as well as a few other topics.  We’ll keep you posted on the date of that meeting.  Please join us if you can.

Time for Another Advisory Committee Meeting

It’s time for another Supporting All Employees – Classified Advisory Committee Meeting.  This one is scheduled for Tuesday, December 10, 2013.  If you would like to attend, please contact me through this blog and I will make the necessary arrangements.  We are in the middle of our first pilot year, and I will be providing an update of where we are so far.  Additionally, we’ll talk about what’s upcoming this year and a couple of other topics.  You can find the agenda here, and the presentation here.  Additional information will be provided following the meeting.  Hope you can join us!

July 2013

It has been a long time since I last posted on this blog.  The school year is over and we are planning for the next one.  The initial implementation phase (IIP), or “pilot,” of the new classified growth and development cycle did not occur due to a variety of unforeseen circumstances.  The good news is that we will be launching an IIP as soon as school starts up again in August.  Here is a recap of activities that took place during the last school year that will support our launch in school year 2013-14.

We identified the classifications that we will include in our no-stakes pilot.  Most of the groups selected are located at schools or work closely with students.  Additionally, they include some of the larger classifications in the District.  While only about 100 employees will be included in the pilot, they represent a range of classifications.  The proposed breakdown of potential classifications can be found here.

On a different note, the District is moving the processes in the growth and development cycle online.  While there is an existing platform for the teacher evaluation process, there has not been the capacity to move the processes for classified employees onto the platform yet.  However, I was able to develop tools for the classified growth & development cycle by building them into a program that the District has been using for many years as a survey tool.  The online tools are easy to access for employees using their District single sign-on.  In fact, if you have an LAUSD single sign-on, you may access the Self-Assessment tool here, and the Individual Growth Plan (IGP) here.  Feel free to try these out and provide me with feedback.  We strive to make these tools as easy and clear as possible.  The benefits of online tools include not having to follow paper around, and the ability for us to track who has completed the process and when.  This is important as we work to support all employees with these activities.

One thing that you may find is that not all the components of the self-assessment will apply to all classified employees.  We have developed a tool that we are considering for scaling the process.  The format of the tool allows the employee and his/her supervisor to have a discussion regarding the expectations of the position.  Additionally, it results in a list of those components that should be considered in the assessment/evaluation and those that are not necessary for the position.  The scaling tool can be found here.  Please let me know what you think.

I have also been working for the last several months with a training specialist from the Personnel Commission.  He and I have discussed the pilot process (revision 07/19/13 here) and are developing associated training.  This training will be primarily for the supervisors of the employees in the IIP.  This corresponds to the way we conduct training for the teacher evaluation process, with the principals receiving a majority of the training.  We will likely devise a blended training methodology that includes pre-reading, some video/online content, as well as instructor led training.  This will roll out early in the school year.

Finally, a few weeks before the end of this school year, in May, I held a “mini” Advisory Committee meeting.  While everyone was welcome to attend, I did not send out a mass invitation like I have for prior meetings.  I only sent information to the people that have attended all, or nearly all, previous meetings.  I wanted to provide an update and explain the status of the IIP without having to provide a great deal of background information.  You can find the presentation for this meeting here.  Please feel free to contact me if you have any suggestions, questions, etc.  I am always excited to talk about this work.

I hope that everyone has a great summer!

Recap of September 27, 2012 SAE-Classified Advisory Committee Meeting

This meeting covered two main topics (see agenda here) – the proposed initial implementation phase (IIP) of the classified evaluation process and potential additional measures that we might want to incorporate into the process.  The initial implementation will focus on self and supervisor evaluations and growth plan development based on evaluation outcomes.

The IIP will be a no-stakes opportunity for a sample of classified employees and their supervisors to provide feedback on the proposed format.  The process will include

§  an initial meeting with the employee and supervisor to establish expectations,

§  an employee self-assessment against the entire classified performance framework (see the latest version here, and please feel free to submit comments),

§  the development of an Individual Growth Plan (IGP),

§  an evidence collection component where the employee and supervisor will have a chance to collect evidence of performance throughout the year,

§  an end-of-year performance evaluation by the supervisor, and

§  training on the various components of the process.

The initial meeting with the employee and the supervisor should take place at least once for every supervisor/employee pair.  This meeting will help establish the responsibilities of the particular position that the employee is in.  This is more specific than the responsibilities of the classification as outlined in the class description.  Two individuals in the same classification, Office Technician for example, may perform very different activities in their positions, even within the same office.  Sometimes this meeting will require that the employee describe his/her position, and other times it will require the supervisor’s lead on establishing responsibilities.

The employee will evaluate his/her performance against the entire classified framework by selecting a rating (ineffective, developing, effective, highly effective) for each of the areas in the framework.  The Classified Performance Framework is modeled after the Teaching & Learning Framework, which you can find here.  Based on this evaluation, the employee will develop a growth plan for the year, focusing on about two areas of growth.  These areas should be selected from those that the employee has evaluated as developing or ineffective.  If the employee does not have at least two areas with these ratings, s/he can select another area to focus on for the year.  The employee develops the IGP following the instructions built into the form and submits it to his/her supervisor for review and comment.  You can compare the classified IGP with the one for teachers here.  Once the employee and supervisor agree on the necessary growth areas, the employee completes the plan.

Throughout the year, the employee and supervisor will collect examples of evidence for all of the areas that are evaluated.  How this evidence will be cataloged and managed is yet to be determined.  However, at the end of the year, this evidence will be used to support ratings in the various areas that are evaluated.

Finally, there will be an end-of-year evaluation by the supervisor.  The same framework will be used to conduct the evaluation as that used by the employee for self-evaluation.  The steps listed here are strictly for the IIP.  The actual steps of the evaluation process are outlined in the evaluation guidelines that will be included with the process.

In addition to the self and supervisor evaluations, there will most likely be additional measures.  What these additional measures will be has yet to be determined.  What is currently used for teachers is a stakeholder feedback survey, and assessment of the teacher’s contribution to the school community, and contribution to student learning.  We will likely develop similar types of measures for classified, but what those will look like is still unclear.

Additional and more definitive information regarding the initial implementation of the classified evaluation process will follow.  The materials are still under review, as is the process that will actually be piloted.  The materials and steps of the process that I presented at the Advisory Committee Meeting were my draft proposal.  Please feel free to submit comments to this blog or e-mail me directly at heidi.hrowal@lausd.net.

Welcome to School Year 2012-13

Welcome to a new school year here at LAUSD.  I hope that everyone had a relaxing summer and enjoyed some time off.  I spent quite a bit of my time this summer at a District middle school supporting training on the observation process that is being used as part of the teacher evaluation.  It was great to be out at a school site (even if kids weren’t there) and to make contact with so many teachers and administrators.

I also spent some time this summer streamlining the Classified Performance Framework some more and thinking through the performance evaluation process that we will implement this school year on a trial basis.  I worked on linking the professional development offered by our Personnel Commission to the proposed framework, so that once an evaluation is completed, staff can identify District training that might be useful for growth and development.  I have also been working on the tool that employees will use to plan their growth activities for the year.

I will present this information at our next Advisory Committee Meeting, which I have scheduled for Thursday, September 27, 2012.  I also want to discuss other potential measures that we can incorporate into the process.  This will include an overview of what is being used for teachers and how we could potentially incorporate the same or different measures.

Hope you can join us!

June 21, 2012 Advisory Committee Meeting Notes

We held our last Advisory Committee Meeting for the 2012 School Year on June 21, 2012.  We spent nearly the entire meeting reviewing the proposed Classified Performance Framework.  The Classified Performance Framework is the foundation for supporting all classified employees.  From this, we will build evaluation tools, align professional development, etc.

 I loaded a great deal of extra language into the framework from a variety of sources.  At the meeting, we tried to eliminate redundancies; streamline language; ensure a consistent thread through Ineffective, Developing, Effective, and Highly Effective rating categories; etc.  We only got about half way through the document, but I could see the direction the group was taking.  With that in mind, I continued on my own to streamline and consolidate.  You can find the redline document here (so that you can see what we changed).  I’ve also added a clean copy, so that you can see a more final version without the confusion of multiple edits.  If you prefer a Word or PDF version of either of the documents (the links to the sections of the framework, as shown on the first page of the document, are live in the Word and PDF versions – for some reason they disappear when converting to a Google doc format), please send me an e-mail requesting that to:  heidi.hrowal@lausd.net.

PLEASE REVIEW AND PROVIDE ME WITH ANY COMMENTS BY THE END OF JULY 2012.  I invite your feedback regarding these documents.  Please review and look for:

• redundancies that we can eliminate or consolidate,
• any clarifications that we can include to make it more understandable,
• consistent threads of content through the various rating categories,
• applicability to all workers types (office-based, technical/professional, classroom-based, field, and supervisor/manager) in the LAUSD classified service,
• ways to simplify or streamline the language.

Send your comments directly to me at heidi.hrowal@lausd.net rather than posting them to the blog.  Feel free to post discussions to the blog, but I prefer that you send me your notes on the document directly.

Starting in August, I will present our “final” to District senior management and the classified bargaining units (although I welcome their feedback now).  We will also begin to link professional development to the various parts of the framework, and begin building evaluation tools.

Recap of May 17, 2012, Advisory Committee Meeting

Our meeting of May 17 was very exciting because we had quite a few new faces.  Welcome to everyone that newly joined us.  We spent most of the time at the meeting going over a very rough draft of the classified performance framework.  Admittedly, the initial draft was inconsistent and not comprehensive.  The intent was to spark discussion and get people’s ideas on paper.

The language for “Developing” and “Effective” for each of the 7 areas of the framework was posted around the room.  Participants were asked to work on whichever area was of greatest interest to them.  We asked them to revise the language to make it clearer and to ensure that there is a clear difference between developing and effective.  This is an important dividing line in the framework and the language must be clear and understandable.

The revisions to the language that were identified at that meeting can be found here for Developing and here for Effective.  Anything crossed out was removed and wording highlighted in blue was added.  Feel free to comment on the changes you see, make additional recommendations, etc.  You can comment to this blog, or send an e-mail. 

I am continuing to work on revising these by meeting with people throughout the District, at various meetings scheduled over the next few weeks.  Additionally, the Advisory Committee will continue to work on this throughout the summer.

Brief Note on May 17, 2012, Advisory Committee Meeting

Thanks to everyone who attended the May 17th meeting.  We had quite a few new faces, and some good discussion.  I won't be ready to post the notes until some time next week.  Additionally, based on some discussion, we already saw some issues with some areas of the initial performance frameworks.  I will be putting my head down and trying to address those, hopefully before I begin the meetings throughout the District over the next couple weeks.

In order to ensure one more meeting before the school year ends, I will have one more Advisory Committee Meeting during mid-June.  This meeting will be held at the Beaudry Building from 3:30 - 5:00 p.m. on the selected date. Please go the survey and indicate your date preferences.

Thanks for your interest in this work!

Next Advisory Committee Meeting - Thursday, May 17, 2012

Thanks to all of you that provided input that helped us determine the date for this Advisory Committee Meeting.  At this meeting we will be reviewing the initial draft of the classified performance framework.  You can access the document here.  We will be working on clarifying "Effective" and "Developing" in each of the sections.  Feel free to get input from others or prepare your own notes prior to coming to the meeting.  I look forward to working with all those that attend.

The meeting is at Beaudry headquarters on Thursday, May 17, from 3:30 - 5:00 p.m.

May 2012 Advisory Committee Meeting

Wow - April really zoomed by.  I spent quite a bit of time working on developing the structure and defining the framework for classified employee performance based on the work at the last Advisory Committee Meeting.  I will post the materials prior to our next meeting for review and comment, but I'm still playing around with format options and want to try a couple of things out.

In the meantime, I'm looking at Thursday, May 17 or Monday, May 21 as potential dates for our next meeting.  Please respond to this survey to let me know which date works better for you.  I am also opening up this invitation to those individuals who have indicated a willingness and desire to participate as focus group members (we have about 350 people indicating interest).  These are all classified employees throughout the District.  I am looking forward to their input.

See you soon!

Advisory Committee Meeting - March 26, 2012 - Recap

We held a Supporting All Employees - Classified Advisory Committee Meeting on Monday, March 26, at 3:30 p.m. at District headquarters.  Click on these links to find the agenda and presentation materials.  The primary purpose of this meeting was to organize the list of competencies that we have gathered over the course of the last few months.  We had asked various groups (including readers of this blog) to provide input regarding those competencies that all classified employees should possess for successful performance as an LAUSD employee.  We had quite a number of competencies, many of which overlapped or varied only slightly.  The committee worked to organize the list, determine whether the list was complete, and eliminate any competencies that would not be readily understandable by everyone without having to read the definition.  The group organized the competencies by header/title, sub-categories, and terms to use in the definition.  You can find the result in these editable notes.  Please take some time to look at the list and indicate whether you agree or not, and any thoughts or suggestions that you have that clarify the information.

Over the course of the next month, I will begin to define the various parts of these competency lists.  I will work on one of the 7 competency areas at a time and post as I go.  I encourage your involvement in the process.

Next Advisory Committee Meeting

Hi everyone.  I’ve been checking, but I don’t see any comments/suggestions for competencies that we should consider as part of our Classified Framework, except for those that we discussed at our last meeting.  I have had a chance to meet with a few other stakeholder groups in the meantime, and will be incorporating the information captured into an outline that I will present at our next meeting.  In the meantime, I encourage you to go to the notes from the last meeting and add your comments, or list any other competencies that you think are important for all classified employees.  The document can be edited, so your input can be placed directly in the document.  Or you can comment to the blog with your ideas and I can include that information.

Our next meeting will be held the last week of March, or early April.  Please go to this survey and let me know which date works best for you based on the choices provided.  I want to make sure that we have as much involvement at these meetings as possible.

Meeting Notes from February 23, 2012 Advisory Committee Meeting

Our Supporting All Employees – Classified Advisory Committee meeting on February 23 was a good working session.  Our focus was on trying to determine the competencies (COMPETENCY: ability: an ability to do something, especially measured against a standard) that are important for all classified employees.  The agenda and presentation materials are available for review.  However, please note that I added some notes to the presentation materials based on the discussion and for clarity.  Those were not on the slides at the time of the meeting, they are just to provide more information to folks accessing these materials through the blog.

The LAUSD has a framework, or catalog of required competencies, for teachers, and for school leaders.  These are fairly comprehensive and are in a near-final state.  There is also an initial attempt at one for District leaders that still needs a great deal of review if it’s determined that it will be used at all.  You can find the full frameworks at the District’s Supporting All Employees web pages.  The documents that I have included are a simple listing, or summary of the competencies that are covered by those frameworks.  In order to try to create some consistency across the frameworks, at least in the sense of using the same or similar competencies, I made a rough attempt at trying to see where competencies aligned across all the frameworks.  All these documents were made available to the meeting attendees in order to provide some ideas on how to proceed.  We are not required to align, especially if alignment means that the framework for classified staff will not be meaningful.

Finally, we spent quite a bit of time brainstorming what to include in the framework for classified employees.  We talked about some competencies that are more overarching, and include other competencies within them, similar to the way the other frameworks are structured.  We threw in ideas for competencies that might be important, even though we realize that we are not necessarily calling them by the best name.  We will have to refine that work before we start to define our competencies.  We want to make sure that our final product is clear, easy to understand by anyone that reads it (without their having to read the definition), and makes sense for all classifications.  We can probably also include some other competencies that are more specific to some positions in order to provide some customization.  These details will still need to be worked out.  The notes that I have included are simply a listing of the areas we discussed.  This document is editable, so please feel free to provide your comments.  You will also see that I have included some comments based on the discussion that we had.  I’ve also included a list of other names for the competency areas for generating ideas. Whew!  That's a lot of stuff.  Hope it makes sense.  If not, send me a comment through the blog and I'll try to clarify.

My next steps are to try to come up with some sort of structure utilizing the information that we gathered.  So, our next meeting will include an outline that we can modify as we see fit.  I’ll keep you posted on the progress of that and will have another survey shortly to determine the best next meeting date.

Meeting Notes from February 8, 2012 Advisory Committee Meeting

The following are my notes from the Supporting All Employees – Classified Advisory Committee meeting we held on Wednesday, February 8, 2012.

From a variety of sources, including our recent survey of classified employees, we have identified a number of potential focus group participants throughout the District.  One of the discussion topics at the meeting was how to engage individuals that indicated an interest in participating in focus groups.  Additionally, how do we find others that would like to be involved but are not yet aware of this initiative?  Because many sites have very few staff available to carry on the work, many individuals are unable to leave their work location during the work day.  Some may be available in the evenings or on weekends, but that does not work for all due to other commitments. 

Advisory Committee participants came up with several ideas on how to engage potential focus group members.  As a result, initially I plan to connect with representatives from the various collective bargaining units (CBUs) that represent classified employees.  Only one CBU was represented throughout the entire meeting on 2/8.  I will share some of the ideas that the group came up with and proceed from there.

How to engage potential members of focus groups

-In-person

-Digital – MyPay-like prompt – survey

-Stipend

-Provide statistics

-Town hall type meeting

-Webinars

-Word of mouth

-SAA meetings

-Incentives

-Phone calls (sample size)

-Union representatives

-TV station (KLCS)

-Kiosk (suggestion e-mail box)

We also asked the participants at the meeting to discuss what we should address with our focus groups.  We started with five recommendations that the Teacher Effectiveness Task Force developed, and which we aligned to the classified service (see presentation from the 11/3/11 Advisory Committee meeting).  We asked participants to address that section, out of the five areas of recommendation, which had the highest priority from their perspective.  Participants broke into groups to discuss the various topics.  Based on the notes, we will go back to the Advisory Group to ask them to prioritize and frame the discussion with focus groups.  These notes are the starting point.  Additionally, many participants agreed that there are many interrelated components within these areas.

Evaluation/Multiple Measures

-Engagement with students, parents, teachers

-Can evaluation be expanded (more categories)?

-Need relevant, update form that encourages feedback

-Mandatory annual evaluations (for real!) (Does the constant churn make all of this less relevant?)

-What would help supervisors provide feedback and utilize the probationary period?

-Can we make the disciplinary process less tedious and lengthy?

Career Pathways/Differentiated Compensation (Recognition)

-Gift cards – merit pay could end up being divisive

Tenure/Probationary Period

-Too long/too short?

-Is it viewed as part of the selection process?

-Only meaningful if administrator takes time to give feedback for performance improvement

Support Mechanisms

-Shadowing

-Training - technical (i.e., computer skills), customer service
-U-Tube-y employee training videos

Legislation

Too early to determine – will wait to see the direction in which we are moving and consider related legislative and policy issues.

Towards the end of the meeting we began discussing competencies and their role in our subsequent classified evaluation, but also their role in the entire classified career cycle.  We are working toward building a list of competencies that are applicable to all classifications within the classified service (currently, there are approximately 1,100 classifications).  We ran out of time before we got beyond an introduction.  The group is very interested in this part of the work.  We will likely work toward creating a framework, similar to those that the District is beginning to use for teachers and school leaders.  This process will probably take several months as we work through various iterations and seek feedback from various stakeholders.

Finally, our proposed next meeting date was Wednesday, March 28.  However, the group is anxious to begin the work on developing our list of competencies.  It is not only important what those competencies are, but also how we communicate them.  We will consider the culture that the District is working to create when defining and communicating competencies.  Therefore, here is a link to a brief survey with some potential meeting dates toward the end of February.  If you plan to participate in the next Advisory Committee meeting, please complete the survey and return it so that I can schedule the next meeting on the most convenient date.  Please keep in mind that this work will probably take place over the next few months.

We had a very productive Advisory Committee Meeting last Wednesday, February 8.  I will post the notes and some other materials and information early next week.  In the meantime, here are the agenda and presentation materials.  We mainly focused on the results of our recent survey of classified staff.  You can find a link to the results document in my prior post (2/7/12).  I will create a brief survey and add a link to it in my next post so that we can determine our next meeting date.  We began a discussion about competencies but ran out of time.  We will actually be spending quite a bit of time exploring this topic over the next several months.

Happy New Year!  Okay, I know it’s already February, and the year isn’t quite so new anymore, so happy new-ish year.  Since my last post, we launched a survey of all 38,000 LAUSD classified employees to find out their experience with/exposure to various support mechanisms.  We had about a 7% response rate – not bad considering we had a fairly short window for response, we didn’t do any pre-notification that the survey was coming, nor did we send any follow-up reminders.  Most employees received the survey in an e-mail.  We did mail it by internal and U.S. Mail for a small group that don’t access the internet with their LAUSD sign-on or are substitutes not located at a specific site.

While most of the survey results are at least somewhat positive, they are not overwhelmingly so.  We will be exploring, at our next Advisory Committee Meeting, how to address some of those issues, including how to communicate the supports we do have.  Our next Advisory Committee Meeting is on Wednesday, February 8, 2012, at 3:30 p.m.  These meetings are open to the public.  If you would like to join us and do not work in the Beaudry building, please comment to this blog so that I can ensure that you have the appropriate access to the meeting.  I will post the meeting presentation materials after the meeting date.

Yesterday, November 3, 2011, we held our second Supporting All Employees – Classified Advisory Committee Meeting.  We discussed our plans going forward.  Our primary focus right now is ensuring that we have the supports in place to provide classified staff with the opportunities to develop and grow in their positions before we launch our performance appraisal process.  We discussed the recommendations from the Teacher Effectiveness Task Force that the LAUSD worked with over a year ago.  While many of the recommendations of that committee were intended to be specific to teachers, many apply to classified employees as well.  We will be aligning with many of the recommendations on our work for classified staff.  Click here for the agenda, and here for the presentation.

As an initial analysis, we plan to launch a brief survey to all 38,000 classified employees in the LAUSD late next week.  We want to find out how familiar folks are with the supports that we already have in place.  Additionally, we will ask staff to self-identify themselves if they are interested in joining focus groups throughout the District to help us improve our support mechanisms.  The survey will be available here once we launch.

We invite anyone interested to join us at our upcoming Advisory Committee Meeting. It will take place on Thursday, November 3, at LAUSD Beaudry headquarters, room 12-192, from 3:00-5:00 p.m. If you would like to attend but are not housed at headquarters, please comment to this post and we will enter your name into the building's visitor management system.

At the meeting, we will present some information regarding
* the organization of the Talent Management office,
* plans for a survey that we will be sending to all LAUSD classified employees,
* how to better engage our stakeholders, and
* other related topics.

Since starting on this work a few months ago, we had determined a plan of action for moving forward.  We were going to be looking at performance management by working with one classification, or a small group of similar classifications, at a time.  With over 1,100 classifications in the non-teaching service of LAUSD, we realized that this would take us a long time.  So, we’re taking a step back and looking at things from a different perspective.

We are starting by asking the question:  What does it mean to be a supported employee?  We align to the Superintendent’s core strategy of Supporting All Employees so that seems like a good place to start.  Employees will understand that we are looking at performance and building a performance management and evaluation process, but we want to ensure that the proper supports are there for employees once they, with the help of their supervisors, determine their career path through LAUSD.

We have started to look at the various supports that are available through our human resources department as they apply to non-teaching (classified) staff.  But, we realize that we need to find out what employees want/need.  We are exploring ways to gather that information in a systematic manner. 

In the meantime, how about sharing with us what you think it means to be a supported employee.  Please be sure to include some background information about yourself so that we can help determine how to best use the information – are you an LAUSD non-teaching employee?  are a community member who has some ideas in this area?  are you an employee of another organization and have strong feelings regarding what it means to be a supported employee?  are you a parent with a student in one of our schools and you see the work that our non-teaching staff do and have some ideas about how to support them?  We welcome all input!

Hi all.  Thanks to everyone who has viewed this blog, and everyone that has commented.  I would love it if more people would weigh in…

In this work, I see that currently LAUSD does not have a good classified employee evaluation process in place, let alone an employee performance management process.  However, there are managers, sites, and even departments that do have good programs that they have developed on their own.  If you are aware of any of these, please share that information here.

As we work to develop an employee performance management process, we find that we need to better align the functions within the personnel cycle.  This will help us make the cycle consistent and transparent.  We are starting with updating our job analysis process, as mentioned in my previous blog.  We plan to not only look at the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) needed for the job, but also look at the competencies (the other or personal characteristics – the Os/Ps of KSAPs, KSAOs).  We also want to ensure that we have a clear understanding of where classifications sit in the District’s organizational hierarchy, what the typical duties are, benchmarks of strong/weak performance, and a variety of other relevant information.  If you are familiar with any good multi-purpose job analysis models that you have used or heard about, please share.  In addition, any recommendations/ suggestions for reporting of the information captured in order to provide information to current and potential employees would be appreciated.

I have a question – please weigh in.  What would you expect to be the outcome/s of a good employee performance management system?

Finally, some links to websites, reports, etc., that are relevant to various phases of this project, and that I found of interest:

§  Civil Service Reform:  Preserving the Promise of Government, City and County of San Francisco (I especially like the line on page 2 that states “Our system has become, in several key aspects, a triumph of process over purpose.”)

§  Performance Management Home Page, Denver Public Schools

§  Management/Administrative Support Performance Evaluation, Albuquerque Public Schools

§  Management/Administrative Support Performance Evaluation Instructions, Albuquerque Public  Schools

§  Performance Management Home Page, U.S. Office of Personnel Management

§  Strategic Plan 2014, Area Two:  Performance Management, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (the CMS site has some great dashboards and metrics, if you are interested in that kind of thing)