Transcript Document

WELCOME
PR Training
Peggy Mauk
October 12, 2006
Ayres Suites, Ontario
Central Coast and
South Region
Linda Manton
October 17, 2006
Kearney Agr. Center
Central Valley Region
Kim Rodrigues
October 25, 2006
Putah Creek Lodge
No. Coast & Mountain
Region
Purpose of PR Process
• Tool for candidate to measure
accomplishments
• Excellent professional history record
• Assist candidate in establishing goals
• Evaluate progress against position description
• Comprehensive document
• Bench mark for establishment of balanced
program.
(End)
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Assistant Rank
• Entry level
• Demonstrate ability to assess needs and set
priorities, plan, organize, implement and evaluate
• Positive AA commitment
• Evidence of professional competence and activity
and dedication to continue professional
improvement
• All four criteria need NOT BE equally developed
• Emphasis will be on extending knowledge and
applied/creative activity.
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Associate Rank
• Reserved for academics who demonstrate
significant potential for a productive CE career
• Must have demonstrated an ability to set program
priorities
• Relate and interact well w/ colleagues/clientele
• Demonstrated initiative and leadership in total
program development and delivery
• Positive AA commitment and effort
• Becoming a career staff employee & demonstrate
movement towards balanced program.
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Full Rank
• Must have developed an excellent program in the
four criteria and AA
• Successful in terms of positive contributions to
their discipline, intellectual development,
program growth, depth, clientele and colleague
respect, AA accomplishment and professional
improvement
• Program results show excellence in education
• Should include peer reviewed publications and
county and/or statewide publications for clientele
• Expected to have demonstrated long range
planning leadership w/in their program area.
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Full Rank, Step VI
• Documented evidence of an outstanding
program which shows a balance of significant
and continuous growth in the four criteria
• Within the criteria there must be demonstrated
effort and commitment in AA
• Evidence that the candidate’s influence has
continued to grow and that s/he is widely
recognized in his/her specialty.
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX
• Reserved for persons who have made
exceptional contributions to a major program
area, resulting in significant benefits to the
people of CA and contributing favorably to the
prestige of UC and UCCE
• Evidence of continuing superior ability,
professional attainment and growth in the
individual’s field
• Also demonstrate peer leadership, originality, and
ability to work effectively with others.
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX
• Show strong evidence of a well-balanced
program w/ outstanding performance in all four
criteria areas and AA
• Advancement to Step IX is reserved for persons
of the highest distinction whose work has been
nationally recognized and acclaimed
• Strong evidence of a wide scope of recognition
and highly meritorious service.
Reporting CD Responsibilities for
County Directors & Other
Administrators/Managers
Performance in Extending Knowledge and Info
• Leadership, management, and organizational
skills should include:
– Development, motivation and evaluation of
staff
– Evidence of efforts related to local and regional issues
– Relationships with Co. government and agencies
– Activity in cross-discipline or regional programs.
Reporting CD Responsibilities for
County Directors (Administrators/Managers)
Performance--Applied Research/Creative Activity
• Accomplishments related to administrative
innovations should include such areas as:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Leadership w/ staff/programs to reach new audiences
Procurement and management of budget resources
Procurement and management of facilities
Techniques of personnel evaluation
Public relation efforts
Creative staffing
Leadership in encouraging applied research in all
subject areas addressed by CE.
Reporting CD Responsibilities for
County Directors (Administrators/Managers)
Professional Competence and Activity
• There should be evidence of:
–
–
–
–
Leadership in professional societies and groups
In local boards and advisory groups
Staff involvement in professional development
Also include recognition by colleagues/clientele for
administrative leadership provided.
Reporting CD Responsibilities for
County Directors (Administrators/Managers)
University and Public Service
• There should be evidence of:
– Activity on Regional and/or Division Committees and
workgroups
– Contributions to county, community, regional, and
statewide activities.
Reporting CD Responsibilities for
County Directors (Administrators/Managers)
Affirmative Action
• There should be evidence of:
– Efforts of CD and of Staff in reaching
underrepresented clientele
– Outreach programs and of training provided
– Initiating innovative programs which effectively impact
underserved and minority issues
– Describe staff efforts regarding parity/compliance.
END
Program Review Process
• Promotion is an Advancement
– Assistant to Associate (must cover entire career)
– Associate to Full Title (must cover the entire period
since promotion to the Assoc level)
– Full Title from Step V to VI (entire career for Selfstatement and since promotion to Full Title for the
four criteria and AA)
• Full Title to VII, VIII, IX are merits
• Acceleration
– May be Requested for Merit or Promotion that occurs
earlier than normal. (accelerated merit is since end of
evaluation period resulting in last salary action)
Program Review Process
Vice President
Appeals
Associate Vice President
Ad Hoc
(final decision)
Senior Administrative Council
Ad Hoc
All Cases
Regional Director Prepares Recommendation
All Cases
CD and SSPP Director Prepares Recommendation
All Cases
Promo/Acceleration
Candidate Prepares PR Dossier
Senior Administrative Council (SAC)
Roles
• RD Does Complete Evaluation of All Merit,
Promotion and Acceleration Dossiers
• Process Used by SAC
 PL Who is Knowledgeable of Subject Area Presents
Packet and Makes Recommendation
 RD Adds Comments/Defends
 Discussion by All SAC Members
 Recommendation by PLs and Appropriate RD
Made to AVP
 AVP makes decision.
Program Review Process
Vice President
Appeals
Associate Vice President
(final decision)
Ad Hoc
Definite Appointments & Term Reviews
Ad Hoc Committees

1st Cycle
Unless negative
by CD or RD
which triggers
appointment of
Ad Hoc com.
2nd Cycle
3rd Cycle
Merit
Promotion
Acceleration
Term Review
only
Promotion &
Term Review
Acceleration &
Term Review
Period since last
salary action
Entire period
in rank
For merit: since
last merit,
For promotion:
since last
promotion
A Good PR is…
• ACCURATE. Use facts, not feelings.
• BRIEF. Make every word work.
• CLEAR. Say what you mean.
• SPECIFIC. Use Examples.
• PROFESSIONAL. A document that is professional
looking and accurately represents your program.
(End)
2006-07 Timeline for Merit,
Promotion, and Acceleration Actions
Oct.
CD Requests Letters of Evaluation for Accelerations,
Promotions and merits for Full VII, VIII, IX
>Letters submitted on line by 1/10/07
11/1 Deadline for Request of Optional Regional Mentoring
Review
2/1
Completed Dossier Submitted Online (no extensions)
2/7
CD Completes Review so Dossier Ready for Access
Online by RD and Personnel Committee
3/1
CD and SP Director Completes their Evaluation of
Candidate On Line so RD can access
Timeline Merit/Promotion/Acceleration
Actions (continued)
3/29
April
Mid-May
6/11
By 7/1
Online the RD Adds Recommendations
to Evaluations and Signs
Personnel Committee Review and
Evaluation of Ad Hoc Reports
SAC Review All Dossiers and Makes
Recommendations to AVP
Final Decision Made by AVP
Final Decision Provided to RD/CD/SP Director.
Reports from CD, RD, Ad Hoc Committee, SAC
Available on On-Line Program Review
Web site.
END
2005-06
Merit & Promotion Outcomes
2005-06 Merit and Promotion
Approvals*
•
•
•
•
Prom-Acc
Prom-Norm
Merits-Acc
Merits-Norm
• TOTAL
25%(4)
80%(20)
89%(9)
90%(78)
43%(7)
69%(16)
72%(18)
85%(48)
76%(89)
*Preliminary data for 2005--appeals are still pending
Merit and Promotion Approvals
2000
Prom-Acc
80%(5)
Prom-Norm 79%(24)
Merits-Acc
73%(11)
Merits-Norm 90%(63)
2001
50%(10)
63%(16)
67%(15)
88%(49)
2002
50%(4)
65%(20)
70%(20)
93%(54)
2003
Prom-Acc
25%(4)
Prom-Norm 80%(20)
Merits-Acc
89%(9)
Merits-Norm 90%(78)
2004
100%(3)
78%(23)
75%(8)
91%(56)
2005
42%(12)
76%(17)
67%(12)
93%(41)
*Preliminary data for 2006--appeals are still pending
2006*
43%(7)
69%(16)
72%(18)
85%(48)
Other Actions
• Retroactive 1 year
– 3 Cases
• Off Scale
– 5 Cases
• Extra Acceleration
– 1 Case
Merit and Promotion—County
Directors for 2006
Non- County Directors
Salary Action
TOTAL
% SUCCESS
County Directors
TOTAL
% SUCCESS
Promotion - Acc
4
25%
3
67%
Promotion - Norm
11
55%
5
100%
Merit - Acc
12
75%
6
67%
Merit - Normal
42
83%
6
100%
OVERALL
69
74%
20
90%
Merit and Promotion—County
Directors and Other Advisors
1999-2006
Non- County Directors
Salary Action
TOTAL
% SUCCESS
County Directors
TOTAL
% SUCCESS
Promotion - Acc
31
52%
11
55%
Promotion - Norm
102
73%
23
87%
Merit - Acc
62
74%
20
70%
Merit - Normal
341
88%
72
93%
OVERALL
536
82%
126
85%
Measuring our Success
Outputs, Outcomes and Impacts
How do we know how well we’re
doing?
We measure:
• Outputs (products we create)
• Outcomes (changed knowledge,
attitudes, skills, behavior/practices)
• Impacts (social/health, economic,
environmental/physical benefits to
individuals, organizations, populations,
communities)
What is the process?
impacts
the need
Identify
the
problem
activities
outcomes
Determine
what to
do
outputs
Products
or
services
Changes in
Knowledge,
Attitudes,
Skills, Behavior
Ultimate
Social/Health,
Economic,
Environ/Phys
Benefits
Outputs
What did we produce?
• New knowledge/understanding
• New methodologies and models
• Research publications
• Educational publications
• Workshops
• Classes
• Oral presentations to various audiences
Outcomes
What did the participants learn and what did
they do differently as a result of the
program?
• Increased knowledge
• Changed attitudes/intentions -- New decisions
made as a result of information we delivered
• Increased skills
• Changed behavior
• New practices adopted
Impacts
What ultimate benefit was realized -- by a
group, community, population, or society atlarge. What was the change in condition?
– 10% decrease in incidence of food-borne illness in the
general county population
– Average reduction of 20% in monthly spending on food by
participants completing the program
– Total annual savings of $300,000 in costs for hand weeding
for growers who participated in the program
– 25% reduction in average shallow groundwater nitrate
concentration on ranchland in the county
– 8,000 additional acres of ag land protected in land trusts
Invasive Species: Yellow Star thistle
impacts
• Improved health
of ecosystems and
native species
issue
Yellow star
thistle
causing loss
of rangeland
and ecosystem
damage
activities
Conduct research
on prevention &
control; Develop
educational
programs
outputs
• New techniques
for preven./control
• Research pubs
• Educational pubs
• Workshops for
ranchers/land mgrs
outcomes
• Reduction in acres
of rangeland lost to
Yellow star thistle
• Ranchers/mgrs gain
knowledge of recommended methods for
prevention & control
• Ranchers/mgrs adopt
recommended
prevention/control
practices for Yellow star
thistle
Food Safety: Food borne Illnesses
impacts
• Reduction in
number of deaths
from botulism
issue
Every year
there are XX
deaths from
botulism in
the U.S.
activities
Conduct research
on safer food
processing practices
Develop curriculum
for training of
food processors
outputs
• Improved methods
for pathogen control
•Workshops for
food processors
• Research &
educational pubs
outcomes
• Food processors
adopt new practices
In their operations
• Consumers have
increased knowledge
on safe handling of
food at home
• Increased consumer
confidence in safety
of processed foods