Child pages
  • SoIC Staff Development Plans, Performance Metrics, and Pay Increase Policy

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Scope

This policy applies to all SoIC appointed staff.

Policy Statement

The procedures below outline the current SoIC process for staff evaluations development, performance metric evaluation and pay increases.

Reason for the Policy

This policy is being created to establish consistency of the process, and also to give transparency to the process for staff members being reviewed.

Procedures

...

Staff Development Process

 

  1. Each January, input from faculty and staff will be solicited on individual staff performance.  This input is then provided to supervisors to use as part of the evaluation process.
  2. Supervisors should use the standard SoIC evaluation form to document the evaluation.   The evaluation can be performed as an employee self-evaluation (i.e. the employee fills out the form), or a traditional supervisor evaluation (i.e. the supervisor fills out the form).  This is the supervisor’s choice.
    1. With the self-evaluation the supervisor should adjust any scores they feel too low or high.
    2. The supervisor competed/adjusted form should be given to the employee at least a day before a face to face evaluation meeting.  This gives the employee time to digest the information and prepare any questions they might have.
    3. The evaluation form includes an area to document 12 month goals.  These should be reviewed each year.
    4. Each section of the form asks for a score.  These range from:
  • 5 (Outstanding) - Performance which is exceptional and sustained at a level far beyond that of a fully proficient employee; extraordinary.
  • 4 (Excels) - Performance consistently better than that expected of a fully proficient employee.
  • 3 (Proficient) - Performance that meets the expectations of an employee in this position.
  • 2 (Needs Improving) - Performance less than that of a fully proficient employee; improvement necessary.
  • 1 (Unsatisfactory) - Performance does not meet job requirements: immediate and substantial improvement is necessary.
  • 0 (Not Applicable) - Job factor considered not applicable to the position.
  1. Scores of 1 and 5 are reserved for employees who are either really struggling, and are probably on a performance improvement plan, or employees who are truly extraordinary.
  2. While a score of 3 (Proficient) is a solid score for a staff person, SoIC has tended to average a staff score of 4 (Excels).  SoIC has a rigorous hiring process and tries to attract the very best staff.  It is for this reason that the average tends to be 4 (Excels).  This does not mean that supervisors should automatically give staff a score of 4 or higher.  Again, 3 (Proficient) is a solid score for employees that are meeting expectations.
  3. The employee and supervisor should sign the evaluation form, keep a copy, and submit the signed form to the HR Director.The employee signs the form to acknowledge they have received an evaluation; they are not signing to say they necessarily agree with the evaluation. supervisors will start meeting with employees to review employee development plans.  This should be a collaborative process, with the employee providing full input on the plan.  These plans provide a process for reviewing:
    1. Current job duties and position description
    2. Performance standards for major job duties

    3. Behavioral skills (attendance, dependability, attitude, etc.)

    4. Accomplishments, goals, action plan, professional development

  4. Some supervisors may opt to complete the staff development process at a different time of the year if January is a suboptimal time for their office.  This is fine as long as the development process is still occurring at least once per year.
  5. The development plan is a document shared between the employee and the supervisor.  They are not filed with the HR office.

Staff Performance Metric Evaluation Process

  1. Once the development plan is completed, supervisors should begin the staff performance metric evaluation process.  This process normally needs to be completed before Spring break, ready for implementing pay increases during budget construction.

  2. The supervisor and employee should agree on relevant performance metrics for the position being reviewed from the SoIC list of metrics.  Not all metrics will be relevant for all positions.

  3. The supervisor will use the performance metric example guide to gauge the performance level of their employee as a guide to scoring the employee's performance.  This helps provide consistency across the school when scoring employees.  The supervisor will share the scores with the employee for their input.  A supervisor may alter some of the scores based on employee input, but the supervisor's choice is final.

  4. These scoring sheets must be filed with the HR office by the deadline provided to ensure employees are considered for merit increases.

Pay Increase Process – Professional Staff

  1. The HR Manager complies all of the staff evaluation performance metric scores on in a spreadsheet and calculates the average score for each person, and ranks the staff by this statistic.
  2. When the IU Board of Trustee’s decides the salary increase for professional staff, the Sr. Director of Administration and Finance (SDAF) calls a meeting with

    all

    the senior supervisors

    of professional staff

    to discuss:

    1. Recommendations for how the salary increases should be applied to the staff.  This could include using a percent method, or dollar amount method.

    2. The senior supervisors review the ranked staff listing (which excludes themselves) and discuss any staff they feel should be ranked higher or lower.  This process is preformed to calibrate and equilibrate scores since different supervisors may have scored employees differently compared to other supervisors.

    3. This meeting will normally occur in March in even years and May in odd years, due to the state budget biennium timing.

  3. The SDAF reviews the revised rankings and proposed salary increases with the dean who approves the increases for supervised staff.

  4. The Dean, EAD, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies, and SDAF review the scores and ranking of the supervisors.  The same process of calibration and equilibration is applied to the supervisors.  Pay increases are decided based on this ranking.

  5. These pay increases are submitted to the budget office for board approval, with new salaries becoming effective July 1.

 

Pay Increase Process – Support Staff

 

  1. Support staff salary increases are negotiated by the union.  These increases are also effective July 1.

 

Other Details

 

  1. The Board of Trustees approves a salary increase pool, for example a 2% pool.  This means that 2% of all current professional staff salaries are calculated as a dollar amount.  This dollar amount then becomes the maximum that can be used for non-excludable increases.  The funds for this increase come from the school’s operating income; these funds are not given to the school from the campus.

  2. The school has a practice of pro-rating pay increases for staff members that start during the year.  For example, if a person joins from another IU department and starts January 1, they are eligible for half (6/12) of a pay increase.  This is because their pay rate should only be 6 months out of date/behind inflation/etc.  However, if someone starts after the budget has been submitted (March or May depending on the year) then they will receive no increase as the process has already closed.

    1. The benefit of this practice is that it allows the school to recapture some salary increase dollars.

    2. These recaptured dollars can then be applied to staff pay issues that have been raised by supervisors.

     These
    1.   These issues can include (but are not limited to):

                                               i.     Retention concerns

...

                                            iv.     A mid-year promotion that UHRS denied an increase for

Mid-Year Pay Increases

  1. Under certain limited circumstances the campus will approve a mid-year pay increase.  Here are some of the more common reasons for mid-year pay increases:
    1. Reclassification – promotion.  This is a promotion from one level to the next.  For example SS0D to SS0F, or 2AD to 3AD.
    2. Reclassification – exempt.  This is a promotion from non-exempt (overtime eligible) to exempt (not overtime eligible).  For example, 3AD PAO to 3AD PAE.  To receive an increase for this type of reclassification it must be shown that the person’s responsibilities have increased significantly.
    3. IU Office of Affirmative Action approved increase.  In certain cases the Office of Affirmative Action will seek pay increases for employees to address gender and race pay inequities.
    4. To counter an outside offer.  If the school wishes to retain an individual it can seek approval to make a counter offer.  The offered position must be in writing, and must be similar to the position currently held.  If the outside offer is for a higher level position, the campus will generally not approve a counter offer. 

Responsible Parties

Supervisors are responsible for ensuring staff evaluation polices are followed.  The Sr. Director for Administration and Finance assumes overall responsibility for ensuring staff pay issues are addressed.

Definitions

  • Excludable salaries – each year the budget office issues a list of pay increase reasons that can be excluded from the increase pool.  These have included year-end promotions and gender/race equity increases.