Updated Merit Pay Process for MCC Administrators

1. Updated Merit Pay Process for MCC Administrators Committee of the Whole Meeting Tuesday, April 15, 2014

2. Overview Current Evaluation, Salary Increase and Merit Processes Process for Updated Merit-based Structure for Administrators (effective FY 2015-FY 2018) Questions

3. Merit-Based Pay Team Assistant Vice President of Human Resources Associate Dean of College and Career Readiness Chief Communications Officer Director of Infrastructure Operations Executive Dean of Education, Career and Technical Education Manager of New Student Transitions Vice President of Academic and Student Affairs

4. Review of Current Evaluation and Merit Process • Evaluation Process • 13 Performance Factors • Ratings (0-4) • Average Score Tabulated • Merit Process • All administrators received a CPI-U increase (FY 2014 – 1.7%) • Employees not on discipline or performance improvement plan (PIP) received either a 1% or 1.5% merit increased (based on the average evaluation score)

5. Updated Process – Effective FY 2015-FY 2018 • All eligible administrators will receive a CPI-U increase • All salary ranges will increase yearly based on the CPI-U, not to exceed 3% per year • 3% of all eligible administrators’ salaries will be used for merit distribution • Distribution of merit • All administrators’ evaluation scores will be summed • Each administrator’s evaluation score will be divided by the sum total to determine their percentage of the available merit funds

6. Merit Pay Distribution Example NOTE: All merit funds will be distributed.

7. Updated Process – continued • If merit increase moves an employee over the top of his/her range, the overage becomes a bonus • No salary increase will be over 5.9% or below the CPI-U (merit and CPI-U combined) • Administrators who were hired after March 1 of the evaluation year will not be eligible for CPI-U or a merit increase • Administrators who score below a 2.0 and who have been on a performance improvement plan, or who have been on discipline, will not be eligible for a merit increase

8. Integration of Goal Attainment • Each administrator’s goals will be factored in to overall performance • Goal attainment will be weighed equally with the evaluation process (50% goal attainment, 50% overall performance) • Administrators will be given a rating of 1-4 based on the work related to their goals • The rating will be averaged with their score on their evaluation to give a final score, such as: John Smith received a 3.12 on his evaluation John Smith received a 3 on his work related to his goals Final Score – 3.12 + 3 = 6.12 then divide by 2 to get the average 6.12/2 = 3.06

9. Future Considerations Explore methods for collection of 360-degree and/or peer evaluations, in partnership with Performance Evaluation AQIP Team Determine who would be part of an individual’s 360-degree evaluation feedback group Determine how this feedback will be used in an individual’s performance evaluation process

10. Questions