2018-086 Appointee Review FormsDate: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 1 of 11
INFORMAL STAFF REPORT
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
Council Appointee Performance Evaluation Form
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The current Council appointee review process does not include an evaluation form. The formal
review process is currently conducted every October, with a mid-year review scheduled in April.
The mid-year review is informal and consists of a dialogue between the City Council members
and each appointee in a closed session meeting. The October review is more formal in that a report
of accomplishments and goals is prepared by each appointee and shared with the Council prior to
the October meeting. This information then helps guide the discussion during the closed session
meeting. A copy the goals report has been included in the appointee’s official personnel file (“file”)
in the past, although this has not been a consistent practice by Council.
BACKGROUND:
During the mid-year review process for the Council appointees on April 3, 2018, former Mayor
Pro-Tem Bagheri requested Council consider memorializing the review discussion in writing for
each appointee for the formal review in October. The intent was for this written document to be
included in the appointees’ file for future reference.
At the Mayor’s request, the Human Resources staff contacted Texas Municipal Power Agency
(TMPA) to learn more about their evaluation process for their General Manager and to obtain a
copy of their evaluation form. The Mayor felt this could be a good comparison since several Board
members are evaluating the General Manager. The information obtained from TMPA, as well as
a form drafted by a Human Resources staff member using the same categories that are used for
other City of Denton Executives, was emailed to Council on April 17, 2018. There were no emailed
comments from Council, nor has there been any follow-up discussions. Therefore, the Mayor has
requested that staff prepare a report to seek feedback from Council regarding the review
process/evaluation tool.
DISCUSSION:
Since 2012, the review period for Council appointees has been October 1 – September 30, to
coincide with the fiscal year. In 2014, the Council expressed a desire to meet quarterly; however,
that posed to be a challenging schedule, and subsequent Councils did not have a desire to meet that
often. At the February 21, 2018, meeting, the Council agreed that biannual meetings would be
best: April and October. The general plan was for two appointees to be scheduled per meeting, so
with four (4) Council appointees, two review meetings would need to be held in April as well as
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 2 of 11
October. Any challenges in scheduling these meetings would be discussed with the agenda
committee and alternative dates could be considered.
A report of accomplishments for the fiscal year and goals for the next fiscal year would be
requested from each appointee for the October meeting. This information is intended to help guide
the review discussion, and in the past, a copy of the mutually agreed to goals was included in the
appointees’ file. A subsequent meeting would be held to approve any increases, if applicable,
resulting from their performance. A copy of the ordinance authorizing the increase would also be
included in the appointees’ file.
The first biannual meeting was scheduled on April 3, 2018. During that meeting, Mayor Pro-Tem
Bagheri requested Council consider memorializing the review discussion in writing for each
appointee for the formal review in October. There was some discussion among Council about the
best way to memorialize the evaluation in writing--to incorporate all feedback without a form or
written document from each Councilmember. The Council discussed having the Mayor collect an
evaluation form from each Councilmember and compile the information into one report.
As a member of TMPA, the Mayor was familiar with the process/tool the Board used to evaluate
the General Manager; therefore, he requested staff to contact their Human Resources Department
to obtain more information. Staff received information, and TMPA’s tool and sample summary
compilation are included as Exhibits 1 and 2 to this report. It is staff’s understanding that the
following process is used at TMPA:
1. The General Manager will complete a self-evaluation first.
2. The self-evaluation will be sent to all of the Board members.
3. Each Board member will complete an evaluation and return it to TMPA’s Human
Resources Department.
4. A member of the Human Resources Department will enter the information into a
spreadsheet (reference Exhibit 2).
5. Using the averages and information, the Human Resources staff member creates one
evaluation form for the Board to present to the General Manager. Everything is anonymous.
Board Members are not told who said what unless they decide to discuss among
themselves.
A member of the City of Denton’s Human Resources staff also prepared a draft evaluation tool
using the same categories that are used for other City of Denton Executives (reference Exhibit 3).
CONCLUSION:
Staff needs direction from Council as to whether or not to implement a formal evaluation tool, and
if so, which version is preferred:
1. Similar to TMPA’s form (reference Exhibit 1), or
2. City of Denton form, as drafted or with revisions requested by Council (reference Exhibit
3).
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 3 of 11
Regardless of which tool is used, TMPA’s process could be followed. The only exception is the
Mayor would compile the results versus a member of Human Resources (to avoid putting the
Human Resources staff in a potentially awkward position).
Alternatively, the Council could put a copy of the accomplishments and goals reports in the
personnel file.
Council input is requested by Friday, August 3, 2018. If a form is desired, this will give staff time
to finalize the form and send to the appointees so they are aware of the evaluation tool. Input can
be emailed to carla.romine@cityofdenton.com. If Council desires a work session to discuss further,
let me know.
STAFF CONTACT:
Carla Romine, Director of Human Resources
940-349-8344
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT 1
Employee Performance Review – Executive
Employee Name: Position/Department:
Date in Position: Time in Position: yrs. mos.
Date of Hire: Date Completing Review:
Ratings: Please rate the employee on the factors listed below, using the following rating codes:
1. = Unsatisfactory Performance - Fails to meet minimum requirements.
2. = Marginal Performance – Requires closer supervision than is necessary for the job.
3. = Meets Expectations – Performance is what is expected.
4. = Exceeds Expectations - Performance consistently exceeds normal job requirements.
N/A = Not Applicable or too soon to rate employee on criteria
Mark rating points for each
Competency Factor Competency Factors for Position
1 2 3 4 N/
A
☐ ☐ ☐
3.5 ☐ ☐ 1. Communication: Effectively communicates by listening as well as conveying and receiving ideas, information and
direction. Writes clearly and understandably. Uses written and oral language to convey key messages and meaning.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.5 ☐ ☐
2. Planning and Organization: Utilizes logical, systematic, and orderly procedures to meet objectives. Plans,
organizes and implements tasks or programs. Focuses initiative, attention, and actions on a goal, mission, or
objective. Pursues goals with commitment and takes pride in accomplishments.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.5 ☐ ☐
3. Customer Service: Anticipates, meets, or exceeds customer needs and expectation in a timely and courteous
manner. Represents the Agency in a positive and professional manner. Customers include all TMPA external
customers, TMPA employees, other Departments, the Planning and Operating Committee, and the employees or
their representatives of the TMPA Board and Member Cities.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.6 ☐ ☐ 4. Teamwork and Inclusion: Works effectively and productively with others. Supports team mission.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.6 ☐ ☐
5. Problem Solving & Decision-Making: Analyzes and diagnoses problems to resolve them or minimize negative
consequences. Isolates, defines and seeks solutions to problem areas. Analyzes problems or procedures, evaluates
alternatives and selects best course of action.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.9 ☐ ☐ 6. Personal Effectiveness and Values: Projects self-control, confidence, and composure while managing emotions,
time, energy, and performance.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.8 ☐ ☐ 7. Diplomacy: Understands and utilizes formal and informal power structures to achieve objectives.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.3 ☐ ☐ 8. Vision: Imagines, envisions, projects and/or predicts what has not yet been realized.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.5 ☐ ☐ 9. Conflict Management: Addresses and resolves conflict constructively by facilitating agreements between two or
more parties.
☐ ☐ ☐
4.0 ☐ ☐ 10. Leadership and Guidance: Achieves goals and objectives through others. Directs the operations activities and
performance of groups of employees.
36.1 Total Rating Points for Competency Factors
3.61 Total Rating Points ÷10
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 2 of 11
Mark rating points for
each Goal Previous Year Goals
1 2 3 4 N/
A
☐ ☐ ☐
3.2 ☐ ☐ 1. Maintain a safe working environment.
☐ ☐ ☐
2.8 ☐ ☐ 2. Respond to the proposed EPA CO2 emissions reductions rule and any other legislation affecting the Agency.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.0 ☐ ☐ 3. Continue to immediately respond to coal issues.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.2 ☐ ☐ 4. Receive approval from the RRC for additional acreage to be added to ERP, additional acreage to receive full
bond release, and to submit final bond release applications for additional acreage.
☐ ☐ ☐
3.4 ☐ ☐ 5. Continue to facilitate and provide support as requested to the Board, P&O Committee and the Member Cities
pertaining to the 2018 Plan.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ 6.
15.6 Total Rating Points for Goals
3.12 Total Rating Points ÷ Total # of Goals Rated
Overall Performance Rating:
Rating Weight Weighted Rating
Competencies Total Rating 3.61 x (.70) = 2.5
Goals Total Rating 3.0 x (.30) = .9
Total Overall Rating (Competencies Total + Goals Total): = 3.5
☐ Unsatisfactory 0-1.4
Did not meet the key requirements of the job. Excessive direction and follow-up are needed. Immediate
improvement required.
☐ Marginal Performance 1.5-2.4
Met the key requirements but did not meet the requirements in all key areas. Requires closer supervision than is
necessary for the job.
☐ Meets Expectations 2.5-3.4
Met job requirements in all key areas. Performance meets the standards for the job.
☒ Exceeds Requirements 3.5 or above
Met the key requirements of the job in all areas and exceeded the requirements of the job in many areas.
Major Strengths:
Describe the employee’s major strengths and abilities and how they relate to the job requirements.
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 3 of 11
Areas Requiring Improvement:
Describe the specific areas in which you feel the employee needs to improve. Also describe the specific actions that will
be taken by you and the employee to strengthen these areas, any training required, and the deadline for which
improvements are expected.
Training and Development Plan
Please describe any training and development required during the upcoming year. Please include any major training
initiatives required as a goal(s) in the SMART goal format.
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 4 of 11
Goals:
List the goals to be accomplished during the upcoming year (up to 6 SMART Goals) S= Specific, M=Measureable,
A=Achievable, R=Resources Available, T=Time Specific.
Upcoming Year Goals
Goal
No. Goal Metric Target Date
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Employee Comments: (Optional)
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 5 of 11
Required Signatures:
Reviewer: Date:
Reviewer's Supervisor: Date:
Human Resources: Date:
Employee: Date:
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT 2
Sample Summary Spreadsheet of TMPA Board Evaluation Performance consistently exceeds normal job requirements.
Performance is what is expected.Requires closer supervision than is necessary for the job.
Fails to meet the minimum requirements.
N/A:Not Applicable or too soon to rate employee on criteria
Communication
Planning and
Organization
Customer
Service
Teamwork
and
Inclusion
Problem
Solving &
Decision
Making
Personal
Effectiveness
and Values Diplomacy Vision
Conflict
Management
Leadership
and
Guidance Avg Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5 Goal 6 Avg
Reviewer 1 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 0 3.30 0 3 3 3 3 3 2.50
Reviewer 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3.60 0 3 3 3 3 4 2.67
Reviewer 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.80 0 4 2 3 4 4 2.83
Reviewer 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3.30 0 3 3 3 3 3 2.50
Reviewer 5 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.90 0
Reviewer 6 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3.70 0 3 3 3 3 3 2.50
Reviewer 7 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3.60 0Reviewer 8 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3.3 0
Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.9 3.8 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.61 0.0 3.2 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.12
OVERALL PERF RATING:Rating Weight Weighted Rating
3.6 x 0.7 2.5
3.1 x 0.3 0.9
3.5
Major Strengths:
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 5:
Reviewer 6:
Reviewer 7:
Reviewer 8:
Areas Requiring Improvement:
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 4:
Reviewer 5:
Reviewer 6:
Reviewer 7:
Reviewer 8:
Training and Development Plan:
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
Reviewer 5Reviewer 6:
Reviewer 7:
Reviewer 8:
Goals:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 5
Reviewer 6:
Reviewer 7:
Reviewer 8:
1. UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE:
Reviewer 3:
Met the key requirements but did not meet the requirements in all key areas. Requires closer supervision than is necessary for the job.
Reviewer 2:
Total Overall Rating
Did not meet the key requirements of the job. Excessive direction and follow-up are needed. Immediate improvement required.
Unsatisfactory:
0-1.4Marginal Performance:
1.5-2.4Meets Expectations:
2.5-3.4Exceeds Expectations:
3.5+
Reviewer 4:
Reviewer 1:
PREVIOUS YEAR GOALSCOMPETENCY FACTORS FOR POSITION
PERFORMANCE SCALE:
4. EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS:
3. MEETS EXPECTATIONS:2. MARGINAL PERFORMANCE:
Competencies Total Rating
Goals Total Rating
Reviewer 4:
Met job requirements in all key areas. Performance meets the standards for the job.
Met the key requirements of the job in all areas and exceeded the requirements of the job in many areas.
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT 3
DRAFT Council Appointee Performance Review
Employee Name Position
Date in Position Time in Position
This review ensures information is captured as an overall review of the previous year. This evaluation tool has been developed for the
leadership team and contains the following categories for written comments:
Highlight of Accomplishments
Project Management
Budget Management
Workforce Management
Communication and Customer service
Business Process Improvements
Teamwork
Each section allows for a rating and response from the employee and council member. Please rate the employee on the factors listed
below, using the following rating codes:
1. Does not meet expectations – Fails to meet minimum requirements.
2. Meets expectations – Performance is as expected.
3. Exceeds expectations – Performance consistently exceeds normal job requirements.
Provide a rating by marking the rating next to the position. Comments can be made in the area below the rating. An example follows:
Rating: Does not meet expectations Meets expectations Exceeds expectations
Employee x
Comments from the employee
Reviewer x
Comments from the reviewer
Date: July 13, 2018 Report No. 2018-086
Page 2 of 11
Rating Category
1 2 3
Highlight of Accomplishments Provide an overview of your accomplishments over the past year.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Project Management Describe how you are staying current on the progress of department projects and
communicating any delays, ensuring projects are within budget, explores alternative funding when a project
may exceed budget, making sure the process of completing a project is efficient, and tasks are delegated as
needed. Performs evaluations of project process and outcomes and identifies areas that need improvement and
areas where performances exceeded expectations.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Budget Management Monitors department budget and effectively accounts for all expenditures, ensures that
programs are within budget, and makes budgetary decisions by prioritizing programs and services to effectively
and efficiently achieve desired results.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Workforce Management Ensures performance reviews, employee work goals, and development plans are
relevant, measurable, and completed on time; coaches employees in the understanding of their job duties,
performance quality, and continuously improving their competency areas; and effectively manages a diverse
workforce. Please describe how you inspire, motivate, and guide others toward organizational, departmental,
and work team goals. Are you assigning merit increases fairly and consistently with increases given to other
supervised employees for similar performance levels? Detail any significant employee issues or challenges that
need to be addressed.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Communication and Customer Service Describe how you are responsive to Council Members and customers,
both internal and external, including cooperative collaborations with other departments, and breaking down
communication barriers. Include efforts to gather data or feedback from customers to evaluate the quality of
services.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Business Process Improvements What have you done to make your department better, e.g., maintaining morale,
employee engagement, etc.? How are you reinforcing the culture of continuous improvement in your
department? Provide details on current improvement initiatives.
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment
Team Work What are you doing to break down operational and interdisciplinary barriers within your
department and between other departments?
Employee
Comment
Reviewer
Comment