📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Plumas County Grand Jury • 2003-2004

Department of Human Resources

View PDF View Full Original

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F5

Findings 8 findings

F1 Page 12
HR came into existence in 1996.
F2 Page 12
The "Personnel Rules" were originally adopted February 14, 1986 by BOS resolution No. 86-3979. They were completely revised and adopted February 15, 2000 by BOS resolution No. 00-6363.
F3 Page 12
Rule 15 - Performance Evaluation. 15.01 Policy: "Each appointing authority shall be responsible for effectively evaluating the performance and conduct of the department's employees. The frequency shall be at least once a year. An effective evaluation provides written documentation, in regular and timely manner, on the quality of performance and employee departmental needs. Such documentation shall provide a basis for future personnel decisions. The performance evaluation shall be completed and presented to the employee prior to the end of the calendar date covered by the evaluation." (emphasis added)
F4 Page 13
Rule 6 - Salary. 6.05 Merit Advancement by Salary Ste2: "The personnel action shall be based on performance evaluations conducted pursuant to Rule 15." 5. 6.06 Longevity Advancement: "Upon satisfactory performance, as evidenced by a performance evaluation, an employee's salary shall be increased (5%) at the following times: upon completion of seven, ten, fourteen, eighteen, and twenty-one years of full- time continuous and compensated service, measured from date of hire."
F6 Page 13
The CAO has the responsibility to prepare performance evaluations and provide them to the BOS for the seventeen positions that constitute the department heads, which the CAO supervises. The CAO is to provide the department head with a copy of what is provided to the BOS. The BOS makes the final evaluation after a closed hearing with the department head and the CAO. Official personnel records from HR disclose that thirteen of the department heads performance evaluations are delinquent. The HR director has not been evaluated since July 2002. The head of Planning/Building Services was last done October 1997, the head of Public Works was last done July 1997, the head of Probation had gone from January 1991 until December 2003, (the performance evaluation occurred because the department head requested it). The head of Office of Emergency Services (OES) hired in January 1977 (a one- half time appointment) has never received a performance evaluation. This position includes the responsibilities of County Fire Warden; this position is often overlooked by both the CAO and HR Director. HR omitted this position from the listing of department heads they supplied to the Grand Jury.
F7 Page 13
Within the departments there are delinquent performance evaluations for employees whose tenure falls into the time frames when they are not eligible for either a merit or longevity salary increase. This occurs during employment years eight, nine, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, nineteen, twenty, or over twenty-one years of service. These merit and longevity raises are separate from cost of living raises, which usually occur annually and do not require a current performance evaluation. The department heads are responsible for assuring that all performance evaluations occur in a timely manner in their departments. HR does not notify department heads of due dates. The following table shows employees of Plumas County whose tenure status does not provide an opportunity for either a merit or longevity salary increase:
F8 Page 14
HR tracks all employees to verify that each employee has received all raises he/she is entitled to and that the evaluation necessary to support the raise has been forwarded to HR. The evaluation is not official until it is on file in HR.
F9 Page 14
The HR computer system does not pick up due dates for evaluations. The HR Department does not have computer software to track personnel, therefore tracking must be performed manually.

Recommendations 5