JUN 2 9 2009 Superior Court of Californ TY of Trinity By: Donna Hanover, Deputy Clerkia (14- " Trinity County Grand Jury

Conclusions 4

• CL1 Page 3
  Trinity County Personnel Office does not have a system for tracking the evaluations done. There is no system in place to ensure that all employees receive timely evaluations.
• CL2 Page 3
  The committee found that the complainant was denied due process. He was not told in a timely manner, after verbally telling an immediate supervisor of a problem, how to properly file a complaint or advised of the time limitations on a complaint.
• CL3 Page 3
  The employee evaluation processes are governed by county laws. County policy and protocol are established, and the process involves department heads, managers, and supervisors throughout the county. The committee found a need for middle management training in evaluation policies and procedures for the production of useful, meaningful evaluations.
• CL4 Page 4
  Well-established policies and protocols provide the quality and uniformity needed for this county's employee evaluation process. Though the autonomy placed into the hands of each department head allows for discretionary decisions, the process is a collaborative effort. If the policies are not followed, the process may become even more time-consuming, costly, and affect the workplace adversely. The committee recognizes that there are department heads and other managers who follow procedures and complete employee evaluations in a timely manner. We commend them. RESPONSES REQUIRED: Entity Finding/Recommendation Respond in Chief Administrative Officer 1,2,3,4 60 days Board of Supervisors 1,2,3,4 90 days TRINITY COUNTY Office of the County Administrator DERO B. FORSLUND County Administrative Officer P.O. BOX 1613, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093-1613 PHONE (530) 623-1382 FAX (530) 623-8365 RECEIVED SEP 21 2009 TRINITY COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT TO: The Honorable James Woodward, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: Dero B. Forslund, CAO SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2008-09 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report Re: Personnel and Administration DATE: The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their final report on Personnel and Administration. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows: Finding #1: The committee found that there was a lack of communication between management and employee pertaining to the implementation of the Compensation Study. The complainant was not notified in a timely manner when the Compensation Study adversely affected his compensation Response: We do not agree Recommendation #1: Employees should be notified immediately any time their position or pay status is changed. Employees pay status should be reviewed during the annual evaluation. Response: While we do not agree with the finding we do agree with the recommendation. The policy of the County is to immediately notify any employee of a change is position or pay status. Finding #2: The employee evaluation processes are governed by county laws. County policy and protocol are established, and the process involves department heads, managers, and supervisors throughout the county. The committee found a need for middle management training in evaluation policies and procedures for the production of useful, meaningful evaluations Response: We agree Recommendation #2: Management, as part of annual training, should review the applicable procedures in the County Code that pertain to employee evaluations. Within the next 2 years, the Personnel Department should implement a computer program for employee evaluations. There are computer programs that guide and prompt the evaluator in a comprehensive manner, resulting in a more thorough, time saving, and objective evaluation Response: Will be implemented. New versions of the Personnel software have been installed which include the recommended functions. Finding #3: Trinity County Personnel Office does not have a system for tracking the evaluations done. There is no system in place to ensure that all employees receive timely evaluations Response: We disagree Recommendation #3: The Personnel Department must remind, in writing, all department heads when an employee evaluation is due. Personnel should also notify any incoming manager that he/she is expected to continue monitoring and performing the employee evaluations during the time of transition. "On the spot" oral evaluations should be used as necessary. Response: As discussed in the response to Recommendation #2 software has been installed to implement the recommendation Finding #4: The committee found that the complainant was denied due process. He was not told in a timely manner, after verbally telling an immediate supervisor of a problem, how to properly file a complaint or advised of the time limitations on a complaint. Response: We disagree Recommendation #4: Our committee concurs with the Development and Environmental Final Report, Recommendation #6. An additional recommendation would be that the employee handbooks also include the time limitations imposed on the complaint process. Response: Will be implemented before the next round of employee orientation, with the exception of the recommendation that complaints go to the Personnel Department. These complaints and their tracking should be done in Administration. TRINITY COUNTY Office of the County Administrator DERO B. FORSLUND County Administrative Officer P.O. BOX 1613, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093-1613 PHONE (530) 623-1382 FAX (530) 623-83_6,5 RECEIVED APR 2 0 2010 TRINITY COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Date: March 30, 2010 To: The Honorable Anthony Edwards, Presiding Judge of the S erior Court From: Dero Forslund, County Administrative Officer Subject: Supplemental response to Recommendations of 2008-09 d Jury Re: Personnel and Administration Finding # 1: The committee found that there was a lack of communication between management and employee pertaining to the implementation of the Compensation Study. The complainant was not notified in a timely manner when the Compensation Study adversely affected his compensation. Response: We do not agree. The compensation study was available to all employees as it was adopted by the Board. The Compensation Study recommended many changes in the employee salary schedule. Some employees received salary increases and some did not. A few received salary decreases. In the case of a salary decrease the employee's salary was not decreased but the employee was "Y" rated which meant that the employee's current salary was frozen at the higher level until scheduled step increases "caught up" with the employee's existing salary. The fact that an employee was "Y" rated would have been discussed at least every time a step increase would normally have been available to the employee. The employees have a grievance procedure available to them which includes issues such as salary disputes. Employees are reminded each month as to their pay rate when they receive their pay stubs. Finding #3: Trinity County Personnel Department does not have a system for tracking the evaluation done. There is no system in place to ensure that all employees receive timely evaluations. Response: We disagree. The Personnel Department does track when evaluations are due. Anniversary dates for step increases are kept in the personnel database and evaluation must be completed prior to a step increase being given. The recently upgraded Human Resource module to the County's financial system has the ability to track when evaluations are completed. Finding #4: The committee found that the complainant was denied due process. He was not told in a timely manner, after verbally telling an immediate supervisor of a problem how to properly file a complaint or advised of the time limitation on a complaint. Response: We disagree. The process of filing a complaint, grievance or claim against the County is well defined in the employee manual, County Ordinance and California State Statute. Employees have access to this information in his or her employee handbook, through the Union or the Personnel Department. Employees are not denied due process if they do not make themselves aware of statutory time limits. Recommendation #4: Our committee concurs with the Development and Environmental Final Report, Recommendation #6. An additional recommendation would be that the employee handbooks also include the time limitations imposed on the complaint process: Response: Recommendation will be implemented before the next round of employee orientation which will begin in Fiscal 2010-2011. The exception is that complaints will go to Administration and for action and tracking. TRINITY COUNTY Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 1613, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 PHONE (530) 623-1217 FAX (530) 623RECEIVED OCT 1 6 2009 TRINITY COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT TO: The Honorable James Woodward, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2008-09 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Personal and Administration - Final Report DATE: October 6, 2009 The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their final report on issues surrounding Personal and Administration. The Board of Supervisors' response is as follows: Finding #1: The committee found that there was a lack of communication between management and employee pertaining to the implementation of the Compensation Study. The complainant was not notified in a timely manner when the Compensation Study adversely affected his compensation. Response: We disagree in part since the board, as a whole, has not been directly aware of lack of communication on this matter. Recommendation #1: Employees should be notified immediately any time their position or pay status is changed. Employees pay status should be reviewed during the annual evaluation. Response: Requires further analysis by the CAO in conjunction with all department heads over the next 90 days. Finding #2: The employee evaluation processes are governed by county laws. County policy and protocol are established, and the process involves department heads, managers, and supervisors throughout the county. The committee found a need for middle management training in evaluation policies and procedures for the production of useful, meaningful evaluations. Response: We agree in part. The process is governed by county policy and state law. JUDY PFLUEGER JUDY MORRIS ROGER JAEGEL HOWARD FREEMAN WENDY REISS DISTRICT I DISTRICT 2 DISTRICT 3 DISTRICT 4 DISTRICT 5 -36- Recommendation #2: Management, as part of annual training, should review the applicable procedures in the County Code that pertain to employee evaluations. Within the next 2 years, the Personnel Department should implement a computer program for employee evaluations. There are computer programs that guide and prompt the evaluator in a comprehensive manner, resulting in a more thorough, time saving, and objective evaluation. Response: Has been implemented in part with CAO and departments holding discussion review procedures. More in depth discussion and training will continue with CAO and Personnel Analyst over the next 6 months. CAO regarding personnel evaluation software/programs and report back to the board with conclusions and recommendations within 1 year (September 2010). Implementation, once approved by the board, will be as funding allows with a projected goal of April 2011. Finding #3: Trinity County Personnel Office does not have a system for tracking the evaluations done. There is no system in place to ensure that all employees receive timely evaluations. Response: We agree that additional analysis of current systems is a productive process. Recommendation #3: The Personnel Department must remind, in writing, all department heads when an employee evaluation is due. Personnel should also notify any incoming manager that he/she is expected to continue monitoring and performing the employee evaluations during the time of transition. "On the spot" oral evaluations should be used as necessary. Response: Will be implemented with direction from CAO within 90 days. Finding #4: The committee found that the complainant was denied due process. He was not told in a timely manner, after verbally telling an immediate supervisor of a problem, how to properly file a complaint or advised of the time limitations on a complaint. Response: We disagree in part since the board, as a whole, has not been directly aware of lack of communication on this matter. Recommendation #4: Our committee concurs with the Development and Environmental Final Report, Recommendation #6. An additional recommendation would be that the employee handbooks also include the time limitations imposed on the complaint process. Response: Requires further analysis since the board, as a whole, is not in receipt of the Development and Environmental Final Report. TRINITY COUNTY Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 1613, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 PHONE (530) 623-1217 FAX (530) 623-8365 RECEIVED APR 2 0 2010 TRINITY SUPERIORCO UNT'w co Date: April 20, 2010 To: The Honorable Anthony Edwards, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court From: Trinity County Board of Supervisors Subject: Supplemental response to Recommendations of 2008-09 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report Personnel and Administration Finding # 1: The committee found that there was a lack of communication between management and employee pertaining to the implementation of the Compensation Study. The complainant was not notified in a timely manner when the Compensation Study adversely affected his compensation. Response: We disagree. The Compensation Study was done in conjunction with Employee Memorandums of Understandings negotiated with the employee bargaining units and was in fact implemented over a 3 year period. All employees had access to the study and could see how they were impacted as it was implemented. Finding #3: Trinity County Personnel Department does not have a system for tracking the evaluation done. There is no system in place to ensure that all employees receive timely evaluations. Response: We agree that additional analysis of current systems is a productive process. The Board has provided resources to implement upgrades to the Human Response computer system that will include tracking of employee evaluations. Finding #4: The committee found that the complainant was denied due process. He was not told in a timely manner, after verbally telling an immediate supervisor of a problem how to properly file a complaint or advised of the time limitation on a complaint. Response: We disagree. The employee had access to information as to how to file a claim with the County. The time limits are in the statutes that the employee had access to. County employees have other venues in which to file actions in the event a claim is denied by the County. Recommendation #4 Our committee concurs with the Development and Environmental Final Report, Recommendation #6. An additional recommendation would be that the employee handbooks also include the time limitations imposed on the complaint process. JUDY PFLUEGER JUDY MORRIS ROGER JAEGEL HOWARD FREEMAN WENDY REISS DISTRICT I DISTRICT 2 DISTRICT 3 DISTRICT 4 DISTRICT 5 -3 7 a- Response: Recommendation will be implemented before the next round of employee orientation which will begin in Fiscal 2010-2011. The exception is that complaints will go to Administration and for action and tracking.

No Responses Found 2

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.