2011-07-27 Merit Appeals Board Minutes

Home

Ms. Toriano recalled that the task presented at the last meeting was to collect evaluation forms that were being used by different groups. The packet before the Board has a total of five. Her perception from the last discussion was that one of the challenges they faced was obtaining feedback that could be used to complete the evaluation. With that being said, the first form, the Hawaii County Merit Appeals Board Evaluation Questionnaire, was the last document used at the time Mike Ben was being evaluated; and it was designed to obtain feedback from user groups. The user group consists of primarily the Mayor and the departments. Ms. Toriano is not comfortable in saying is that they deal a lot with the public. In HR, they tend to deal more internally as a service department. Other documents included the Chief of Police, Fire Chief, Hawaii Health Systems Corporation, and the Kauai jurisdiction evaluation forms. Criteria common in all of these documents include areas such as fiscal, ability to plan and organize, responsiveness to the users. Of course, for Police and Fire there is that public element that they're evaluating. Mr. Silva stated that the tool he found most productive, although they all would have to be modified, is the Chief of Police's evaluation, which is shorter and to the point. A couple of elements can be pulled out, but he's looking along the lines of criteria 10. He also suggested perhaps putting a notice in the paper to solicit comments about the evaluation and include a deadline for submitting comments. The Board might also want to designate one of the members to put something together as a starting point and everybody can take it apart after that. Mr. De Lima recalled that at the last meeting, he referred to the State's form that they use for their top administrators, one of them who was the former EUTF administrator who now serves on the Board of Education. He will look through his materials and share with the Board that evaluation form. He thinks the State's form allows for a more constructive process, because what it does is forces the administrator to first come up with specific objectives that are proposed to the Board for the upcoming year. They all agree on the assigned value of each of the objectives, then based upon the agreed-upon objectives at the beginning of the year, the administrator is evaluated. This process is not too far apart from what Mr. Silva was saying, and it forces an articulation and then acceptance. 3