Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review. Marlene Canter, Chair, Human Resources Committee

Transcription

1 Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review Marlene Canter, Chair, Human Resources Committee February 19, 2002

2 Introduction In July 2001, the Board of Education created a committee devoted to reviewing issues and creating policy related to recruitment, retention, professional development, and evaluation of all District employees. The creation of the Human Resources Committee represents the Board s commitment to ensuring that the District has the means to attract, develop, and retain highly qualified employees. In its first five months, the Committee has succeeded in bringing a new focus to HR issues. In its reviews of administrator and teacher recruitment, selection, and assignment, the Committee has uncovered several areas ripe for improvement and has secured a commitment from the Superintendent to make enhancing HR processes and policies a top administrative priority. In addition, the selection of a new Chief Operating Officer will help to ensure that the District remains focused on improving HR issues. This document serves to review the Committee s work to date and identify work in progress. The intent is that the Committee will use this report to focus its efforts for the rest of the year. The document also serves as tool for the Superintendent and his staff as they work to follow up on the issues identified by the Committee. The Committee hopes that the Superintendent will review the issues discussed in this report, prioritize them, and present timelines for implementation. Administrator Recruitment, Selection, and Assignment Recognizing the crucial role that principals play in promoting student achievement, the Committee initiated an examination of the District s recruitment, selection, and assignment systems for administrators. The Administrator Shortage The Committee learned that many current school administrators are new to the job, that many school administrators often find the job overwhelming, and that there is an expected administrator retirement rate of 35% within the next three years. HR staff also reported that traditional areas of need have been in Assistant Principal Student Counseling Services and Assistant Principal Secondary Support Services positions. HR staff indicated that these positions are difficult and that the pay may not be commensurate with the job demands. Given these factors, it is clear that the District needs to be concerned about its ability to recruit top administrators. The Principal Pipeline In examining this need for recruitment, the Committee found that current principals play a crucial role in identifying and mentoring future administrators by providing leadership and growth experiences at the school site. Additionally, HR staff reported that several Local District Superintendents have developed cadres of future administrators by establishing relationships with local universities and setting up cohorts of administrative credential candidates within their local districts. However, HR staff reported that the inability of principals to select employees for quasiadministrative positions has made it difficult to create a pipeline wherein promising candidates move through the chairs to the principalship and that the negative image of the District had hindered efforts to recruit from outside the District. Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 2

3 The Exam Process The Committee also discussed the quality of the exam process. Representatives from the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles urged Committee members to revisit the assessment center format, stating that it was a way in which to identify the best candidates for administrative positions. HR staff indicated that the exam design, which replaced the assessment center, incorporates most of the psychometric features of the assessment center but at a significantly reduced cost. Still, the Superintendent expressed concern over the current system. In a presentation of his HR goals, the Superintendent indicated that the current system would be used to produce a new two-year eligibility list for principals and that work would begin immediately afterward to develop a more comprehensive testing system. The Committee also considered changing various board rules governing administrator appointments not made from an eligible list. At question was whether employees who had not been appointed from an eligible list should be exempt from taking an exam after 2 years of satisfactory service rather than the current 3-year satisfactory service requirement. Committee members expressed reservation about changing the rules without a complete review of the examination process and the definition of satisfactory service. Committee members agreed to revisit the issue after the Superintendent completed his review of the exam process as a whole. The Committee originally expected the Superintendent s report in October 2001 but later learned that the Superintendent had contracted with an outside consultant to conduct a fuller review of HR related issues. Among the consultant s charge is an evaluation of the strategies and approaches that are currently used to recruit, select, and train new principals. Making the Job of Principal Easier Perhaps a fundamental reason for the principal shortage is the perception among potential candidates that the job of principal is overwhelming. A survey conducted by the Independent Analysis Unit (IAU) confirmed that perception among a sample of principals. At the request of the Committee Chair, the IAU interviewed 18 randomly selected principals to identify ways the District can improve the preparation and recruitment of principals. The survey found that the quantity of work attached to the principalship makes the job unattractive and acts as a deterrent to prospective principals who find contact with students and teachers the more rewarding parts of their job. The Committee also heard from the Personnel Commission, which had begun a study to address the issue of principal workload at the request of the Superintendent. Although the study is still in progress, the Committee heard a number of preliminary findings and recommendations. Many of the recommendations had the potential for immediate, low-cost implementation and Committee members urged staff to move quickly to implement those changes. In addition, the Committee requested a follow-up report prioritizing the preliminary recommendations and providing a timeline and cost implications for implementing them. Ultimately, the Committee expressed hope that the study could direct the Committee and District in redefining the work of the principal to maximize administrator effectiveness and make the job more attractive to high-quality candidates. The Ewing Study After several principals expressed concern over the salary structure for single administrator schools, the Committee Chair asked Committee Member Fullerton to review the School Based Administrator Compensation Study (the Ewing Study). Mr. Fullerton reported that part of the study had been implemented recently and as a result there had been insufficient time to clearly understand the study s impact. However, the system designed through the study had some areas that could be Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 3

4 examined for change. Specifically, the possibility of adding improvement in school performance as a factor in determining principal salary may be an area worth further study. The Committee decided that a reexamination of principal salary determinants should be conducted holistically as part of the Superintendent s ongoing examination of the principalship. Assignment Finally, the Committee reviewed the principal assignment process. The current system is split into two parts. Approximately half of all principals are directly assigned to schools by local district superintendents, while the other half of positions are at LEARN/SBM or charter schools with local site selection procedures. While the LEARN/SBM system allows for more local site input into the selection process, it also takes substantially longer to fill positions, and often necessitates the placement of an interim administrator while selection committees deliberate. In addition, LEARN/SBM candidates are not always exam-qualified. Of the 275 school based administrators that have been appointed under Board Rule 4214, which allows for special appointments, just over 60% were appointed via the LEARN/SBM local site selection process. It is the Committee s understanding that the Superintendent intends to provide recommendations regarding local site selection processes. Work in Progress Recognizing the role that principals play, the Superintendent has allocated resources to an in-depth review of the principal recruitment, selection and assignment process. The Committee and the Superintendent are working to schedule a date for the report. The Personnel Commission s study of administrative and clerical workload at school sites continues. The Committee expects an update on the study in April as well as an implementation report on the study s preliminary recommendations in March. Teacher Recruitment, Selection, and Assignment While the Committee has not spent as much time engaged in an in-depth examination of the District s procedures regarding teachers as it has reviewing the District s system for administrators, it has made substantial headway in reviewing the District s system of teacher recruitment, selection, and assignment. The Teacher Shortage As the chart to the right illustrates, the total number of K-12 vacancies is relatively small compared to the teacher population of 37,223 (recorded on norm day, October 15, 2001). HR staff reports that there continues to be a shortage of fully credentialed teachers, especially in mathematics and special education. As of norm day, 5,357 teachers or 14.4% were on emergency credentials. K-12 Vacancies September January September 328 October 260 November 205 December January Source: Monthly Report on Filled and Unfilled Positions Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 4

5 Hard-to-Staff Schools After reviewing teacher vacancy reports by school, the Committee noted that many schools have several vacancies and asked District staff to identify schools that are hard-to-staff. Staff s report illustrated the difficulty of identifying quantifiable measures for hard-to-staff schools. The Committee Chair also commissioned a group of public policy graduate students from the University of Southern California to review the issue and make recommendations to the Committee. The Committee anticipates a final report in May. The Committee also learned about a successful priority staffing program in Local District I, where some schools are considered hard-to-staff. Key to the success of the program was a commitment from principals to interview every candidate that applied to their school and promptly notify candidates of their selection. As a result of priority staffing, Local District I was able to open the school year with just 24 vacancies, as opposed to 170 in the previous year. In addition, this month, the Committee will hear about two teacher recruitment projects intended to recruit highly qualified candidates to hard-to-staff areas within the District. The Teacher Hiring Process Some Committee members expressed concern that the hiring process itself might discourage candidates from applying to the District, thereby exacerbating the teacher shortage. At the request of the Committee Chair, the IAU surveyed 25 randomly selected beginning teachers to gain a better understanding of what attracts teachers to the District, and the processes and procedure teachers experience during the hiring process. The teachers interviewed expressed frustration over personnel processing procedures and complained of misinformation, long lines, and false vacancies. Committee members urged HR staff to act quickly to fix the problems identified in the survey. The Committee expects a report in March. Finally, under SB 1331, the District has volunteered for a review of its HR processes by the Financial Crisis Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), which has contracted with Schromm and Associates to provide a comprehensive assessment of District HR practices. The results will be reported to the Committee in April. Work in Progress Schromm and Associates will provide a comprehensive assessment of the District s certificated personnel processes. The report that will be presented in April. USC graduate students will analyze the extent to which there is an uneven distribution of teacher vacancy rates, turnover, and/or non-credentialed teachers across the District, consider why some schools might be harder to staff, and analyze potential changes to board policies and District processes that might improve recruitment of highly-qualified candidates to hard-to-staff schools. The Committee will receive a report in May. The HR Division will report on a possible system-wide response to problems in the teacher hiring process. The Committee anticipates a report in March. In response to a presentation from Teach for America on plans to expand, the HR Division will examine contracting with TFA to aid in District recruitment efforts. Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 5

6 Matching Budgeted and Filled Positions At its first meeting, the Committee asked the Personnel Commission to provide the Committee with a monthly report on filled and unfilled classified positions. The goal was to better understand the District s recruitment needs. The Committee found that the District was unable to produce an accurate report. Staff reported that position control would correct the problem in the future but that first, unmatched positions would need to be manually researched and corrected. The Committee urged staff to begin the process of manually matching budgeted and filled positions. The Committee will receive monthly updates on efforts to match budgeted and filled positions through June. A review of authorized Special Education assistants and trainees illustrated the mismatch between central office records and the actual number of filled positions. The Division of Special Education worked with the Personnel Commission to reconcile the number of filled positions with the number of authorized positions. As a result of the reconciliation, staff closed 2,450 classroom aide and trainee positions. However, staff must still ensure that authorized aide and trainee positions match budgeted positions. Work in Progress Staff will provide monthly updates on the status of position control and efforts to match budgeted and filled positions through June 2002, when staff expects the process to be complete. Information Systems Over the course of its meetings, the Committee often heard that technology in the HR Division and the Personnel Commission had not kept pace with systems in other parts of the District. The lack of automation and an integrated system impair the two branches ability to effectively and efficiently move candidates through the recruitment, selection, and assignment processes. An Office of Inspector General Audit of the Personnel Commission s hiring process illustrated the inefficiencies associated with the lack of technology. The Inspector General found that manual operations in the Personnel Commission led to over $1.4 million in overtime in the past four fiscal years. Committee members urged the District to pursue a comprehensive management information system that that meets the needs of both the HR Division and the Personnel Commission. Committee members also urged that the District not take a piecemeal approach to the problem. To Do The Committee will revisit the issue of information systems for the Personnel Commission and the HR Division at a future meeting. Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 6

7 Code of Ethics In December 2000, the Board approved a Code of Ethics for employees, contractors, and lobbyists. However, after some discussion and feedback, staff decided that the Employee Code of Ethics would be more effective if it was a document of positive commitments to excellence rather than a discipline tool. In November 2001, the Committee reviewed the proposed draft revision of the District Employee Code of Ethics. Committee members appreciated the draft as a vision statement for how employees should behave but questioned whether the code could be enforced in its new form. Committee members also learned that the degree of implementation of the employee ethics program would vary with the resources provided. The Committee will take the matter up again once the Superintendent has made a recommendation. Human Resources Committee Mid-Year Review, February 19, 2002 Page 7