City Council Appointee Performance Evaluation

Only City Council members and authorized staff are allowed to post on this message board.
Steve Adler
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:12 pm

City Council Appointee Performance Evaluation

Post by Steve Adler »

This memo is also posted here: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 213306.pdf

Council:

Our Council has discussed doing a personnel evaluation of our appointed employees (City Manager, City Auditor, City Clerk and Municipal Court Clerk) sometime during this coming February. I intend to set a Council discussion the first week of February, 2016, on how we will conduct those reviews. In the meantime and over the next month, we can discuss the related issues on the bulletin board and I begin this discussion with this posting.

On September 26, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution no. 20141002-035 that sets out compensation and benefits: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=219238

Resolution no. 20130926-079 sets out a process and Performance Evaluation forms for the Council to evaluate the performance of the Council’s four appointed employees: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=197722

These forms have been reviewed and reformatted by members of my staff and the City’s Human Resource department and this revised formatted form is also attached.
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 213338.pdf

Note it is my understanding that the Council has not followed the proscribed process nor formally completed or filled out the evaluation form in subsequent evaluations. Perhaps this is because if the forms are filled out, they may be subject to public disclosure and this would effectively deny the appointed employee the ability to have a confidential personnel review.

This Council should consider whether to reaffirm and use, reaffirm and use with changes, and/or use as a guide for the personnel review discussions held in executive session even if the forms are not actually completed and filled out.

The evaluation form is based on a previous version of the City Council’s evaluation and other forms produced by the University of Tennessee’s Institute for Public Service and the International City/Council Management Association (ICMA) and contains five Parts:

1. Priority Outcomes – A self-assessment by the appointee of their accomplishments and areas for improvements.
2. Key Performance Areas and Competencies – A review of 11 key performance dimensions and competencies.
3. Audits/Reports – A review of performance audits and third party reports that identify risk areas, findings, and recommendations that related to the appointees’ area of responsibility and accountability. A summary of relevant key audits/3rd party reviews is attached. I believe we should give the appointee prior notice of any intended use or reference to any specific audit or report
4. Development/Growth – Strengths and opportunities for growth.
5. Performance Conclusion – Is the appointee sufficiently meeting the Council’s performance expectations?
6. Anticipated Future Performance Issues and Key Performance Areas – Goals and objectives to be met in the upcoming year.

I think that we do not have to actually complete the form (but we could), instead using the form to guide a conversation with the person being reviewed. The period of review will be the preceding year.

The process steps as I see them are:

• The Council accepts the performance standardized forms and requests that the Human Resources Director then submit the standardized form to each appointee to complete the appropriate part on the form.
• Executive Session(s) will then be scheduled to consider the written or oral Appointee self-evaluation and to discuss this self-evaluation with the appointee. At that time the Council will provide their input and evaluation using the standardized form. The Executive Session(s) will follow Section 551.074 of the Local Government Code and be held in late February 2016 or early March 2016.
• As the last part of the evaluation, the Human Resources Director will provide compensation information on each of the appointees including peer group comparisons and other market information for consideration of any compensation change.
• After the Executive Session(s), the Council will publicly announce the results of the Appointee evaluations including pay and benefit considerations.

The Council Appointees Performance Evaluation – 2017 draft timeline is as follows:

Council Appointees Performance Evaluation – 2017
Draft Timeline

June 2015 Staff Briefed Council on Evaluation Process

August 2015 Auditor provided information/special report

Oct - Dec. 2015 Human Resources worked with Mayor and his staff to redraft evaluation form/process

Jan 2016 Mayor shares information with appointees and council and then council considers feedback (including posts on council message board)

Feb 2, 2016 Process discussed at work session with evaluations to be set for late February or early March.

February Staff emails Council appointees advising them of:
• Dates the City Council will perform annual performance evaluations
• The need for each of them to prepare verbally or in writing and to be prepared to discuss:
o Key accomplishments related to strategic goals and objectives
o Self-appraisal

TBD Executive Session – Mayor and Council evaluate City Clerk and set expectations for new Municipal Court Clerk
- Prior to candidates entering the executive session room, staff provides overview of process and explains compensation/benefit market comparison.
- Candidate takes first 15 minutes to address self-appraisal
- Council provides feedback

TBD Executive Session – Mayor and Council evaluate City Auditor
- Prior to candidates entering the executive session room, staff provides overview of process and explains compensation/benefit market comparison.
- Candidate takes first 15 minutes to address self-appraisal
- Council provides feedback

TBD Executive Session – Mayor and Council evaluate City Manager
- Prior to candidates entering the executive session room, staff provides overview of process and explains compensation/benefit market comparison.
- Candidate takes first 15 minutes to address self-appraisal
- Council provides feedback

TBD Council Items posted for action (3 resolutions and 1 ordinance) related to appointee evaluation to include pay and benefit adjustments and Citywide Midyear market adjustment effective 8/1/16 that was approved in the FY16 budget

2/1/17 Next Round of Performance Evaluations

In addition to reviewing performance, I see the upcoming performance review process for our appointees as one in which we can objectively and frankly discuss performance planning; discuss expectations and development needs; have two-way feedback and discussion on progress; update our objectives; and, reward and recognize good performance as well as discuss performance opportunities for improvement.

Please review the information and let me know your thoughts via the Council message board.

Office of the City Auditor Performance Audits Summary: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 13353.xlsx
Mayor
Leslie Pool
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:22 pm

Re: City Council Appointee Performance Evaluation

Post by Leslie Pool »

Mayor, thanks for bringing this item back up for action. I would like to be sure there is an opportunity for us to receive comments and assessments from our direct reports' colleagues outside the City structure as part of these evaluations :: I believe the term of art is a "360 degree" evaluation. As part of our review in the Audit & Finance Cmte for the Auditor's position, we interviewed people who reported to the candidate, who were in lateral positions, and who worked with the candidate in associations outside of City Hall. These comments were very helpful in the overall decision-making process.

Thanks, and I look forward to working on this together.

Leslie
Leslie Pool
Mayor Pro Tem
Council Member, District 7
Ann Kitchen
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: City Council Appointee Performance Evaluation

Post by Ann Kitchen »

Thank you Mayor for moving this process forward

I would like to concur with CM Pool suggestion regarding the 360 evaluation.
Ann Kitchen
Council Member District 5
Locked