# Presentation: RMSLPNZP57MMCVVV6GFDPFUIBTCVSP7D

## State of WashingtonAuditor’s OfficeHuman ResourceManagement Report

**October 15, 2007 **

## Managers’ Logic Model for Workforce Management

- Auditor’s Office

## Standard Performance Measures

- Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management
- Management profile
- Workforce planning measure (TBD)
- Percent employees with current position/competencies descriptions
- Time-to-fill funded vacancies
- Candidate quality
- Hiring Balance (Proportion of appointment types)
- Separation during review period
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Worker safety
- Percent employees with current individual development plans
- Employee survey ratings on “learning & development” questions
- Competency gap analysis (TBD)
- Percent employees with current performance evaluations
- Employee survey ratings on “performance & accountability” questions
- Disciplinary actions and reasons, disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Reward and recognition practices (TBD)

- Ultimate Outcomes

- Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions
- Turnover rates and types
- Turnover rate: key occupational categories
- Workforce diversity profile
- Retention measure (TBD)

- Auditor’s Office

## Plan & Align Workforce

- Managers are provided expectations for workforce management as part of the PDP process.
- The agency has developed specific written expectations for workforce management.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will monitor supervisor Performance and Development Plan to ensure they consistently contain workforce management expectations

- Outcomes:
- Managers understand workforce management accountabilities. Jobs and competencies are defined and aligned with business priorities. Overall foundation is in place to build & sustain a high performing workforce.
- Performance Measures:
**Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management**
- Management profile
-  Workforce Planning measure (TBD)
- Percent employees with current position/ competency descriptions

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency Tracked Data

**Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management = 100%**

- *Based on 101 of 101 reported number of supervisors

**Workforce Management Expectations**

- Auditor’s Office

## Plan & Align Workforce

- Outcomes:
- Managers understand workforce management accountabilities. Jobs and competencies are defined and aligned with business priorities. Overall foundation is in place to build & sustain a high performing workforce.
- Performance Measures:
- Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management
**Management profile**
- Workforce Planning measure (TBD)
- Percent employees with current position/ competency descriptions

- Management	27
- Consultant 	4
- Policy	  0
- Not Assigned           0

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  HRMS BW

**Analysis:**
- The 7/07 baseline WMS % established by DOP for our agency was 7.6%.  This number was calculated using a staff count of 406, which includes 29 summer interns.  These are seasonal hires that work an average of 3 months per year.  This baseline % also did not take into account two vacant WMS position the agency was currently recruiting for.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to monitor the number of management positions in order to maintain the appropriate ratio

**WMS Employees Headcount = 31**
**Percent of agency workforce that is WMS = 7.6%**
**Managers* Headcount = 28**
**Percent of agency workforce that is Managers* = 7.1%**
- * In positions coded as “Manager” (includes EMS, WMS, and GS)

**Management Profile  **

- Auditor’s Office

## Plan & Align Workforce

- HR has worked with each team on the process of updating their Position Descriptions to the new format, as well as create boilerplate descriptions for Auditor positions that teams can use and update as appropriate to meet their individual needs.
- Remaining 3% of position descriptions needing completion are currently in a draft format and pending finalization.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to work with managers to ensure all positions have updated and completed position descriptions including competencies for any new positions or where changes have been made to work duties.
- HR will distribute a monthly report to agency directors indicating the status of this project by work group.

- Outcomes:
- Managers understand workforce management accountabilities. Jobs and competencies are defined and aligned with business priorities. Overall foundation is in place to build & sustain a high performing workforce.
- Performance Measures:
- Percent supervisors with current performance expectations for workforce management
- Management profile
-  Workforce Planning measure (TBD)
**Percent employees with current position/ competency descriptions**

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency tracked data

**Percent employees with current position/competency descriptions = 97%***

**Current Position/Competency Descriptions**

- *Based on 341 of 352 reported employee count Applies to employees in permanent positions, both WMS & GS

- Auditor’s Office

## Hire Workforce

**Hire Workforce**
**Outcomes:**
**Best candidates are hired and reviewed during appointment period. The right people are in the right job at the right time.**
- Performance Measures
**Time-to-fill vacancies**
**Candidate quality**
- Hiring Balance (proportion of appointment types)
- Separation during review period

**Analysis:**
- This average does not include internships or other temporary positions.
- SHRM Human Capital Benchmarking Report indicates the median time to fill in 2004 for government positions was 51 days, which as our number indicates we are still below the industry average.
**Action Steps:**
- HR and agency Directors will strongly promote the internship program, in order to increase the number of graduates applying for auditor positions.
- HR will continue to monitor the effectiveness of college presentations and interviews to include tracking how many candidates we attract from various presentations.
- HR accurately tracks each hiring process from the
-    time the Request to Fill is received to when the
-    candidate was offered the position.  This ensures
-    accurate data and allows us to monitor time to fill
-    and gives us the ability to make adjustments in our
-    process as necessary.
- HR has increased staff time dedicated to college presentations and interviews as an effort to increase the number of graduates interested in Assistant State Auditor positions.

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency tracked data

**Time-to-fill Funded Vacancies**
- Average number of days to fill*:**  ****	****	****40.43**
- Number of vacancies filled:          		**100**
- *Equals # of days from creation of the requisition to job offer acceptance
- Time Period:   July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007

**Candidate Quality**
- The State Auditor’s office developed a candidate quality questionnaire that we began sending out to manager’s upon conclusion of a recruitment effective September 1, 2007.
- Measures will be available on April 2008 HR Mgmt Report

**Time-to-fill / Candidate Quality**

- Auditor’s Office

## Hire Workforce

- The agency uses an exit interview program to gather input from employees leaving the agency
- The agency has established detailed expectations and competencies, and a program of regular work product review in order to monitor employees during the probationary period
**Action Steps:**
- HR will develop and provide updated to training to hiring managers regarding the hiring process beginning in November 2007.
- HR will continue to provide managers a monthly report of probationary and trial service employees.
- HR will continue to work with managers to ensure that employees performance is being properly evaluated during their probationary and trial services periods as well as annually.

**Total number of appointments =167***
- Time period = July 2006 through June 2007
- Includes appointments to permanent vacant positions only; excludes reassignments
- “Other” = Demotions, re-employment, reversion & RIF appointments

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  HRMS BW

**Separation During Review Period**
- Probationary separations - Voluntary	13
- Probationary separations - Involuntary	1
*Total Probationary Separations**	**14*
- Trial Service separations - Voluntary	7
- Trial Service separations - Involuntary	0
*Total Trial Service Separations**	**7*
**Total Separations During Review Period****	****21**
- Time period = July 2006 through June 2007

- Outcomes:
- Best candidates are hired and reviewed during appointment period. The right people are in the right job at the right time.
- Performance Measures
- Time-to-fill vacancies
- Candidate quality
**Hiring Balance (proportion of appointment types)**
**Separation during review period**

**Hiring Balance / Separations During Review Period**

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
**Percent employees with current performance expectations**
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Worker safety

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency Tracked Data

**Analysis:**
- A large percentage of employees without current written performance expectations are concentrated in a few teams.  Several of these teams also experienced management vacancies during this reporting period.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will work directly with the new managers of these teams to provide training on the PDP process and complete PDP Part 1 expectations by January 31, 2008.
- HR will continue to distribute a monthly report to agency directors regarding Performance and Development Plan status.

**Percent employees with current performance expectations = 92.1%**

**Current Performance Expectations**

- *Based on 328 of 352 reported employee count Applies to employees in permanent positions, both WMS & GS

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

**Overall average score for Productive Workplace Ratings:  4.1**

**Analysis:**
- The agency survey results were higher than statewide averages in every category
- Supervisors treat employees with dignity and respect (91%) and I know what is expected of me at work (90%) were the 2 highest rated categories
- I receive recognition for a job well done (56%) and my supervisor gives me ongoing feedback that helps me improve my performance (69%) were the 2 lowest rated categories
- HR has worked to develop a Recognition website as well as a variety of tools that managers can use to recognize staff
- 25 SAO Managers attended the Leadership Speaker Series Recognizing and Retaining Employees with Beverly Kaye
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to develop recognition tools and ideas to have available to managers as well as educate managers on the importance of recognition for a job well done and the impact it has on staff morale

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  2006 Employee Survey

- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
**Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions**
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Worker safety

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

**Analysis:**
- Agency overtime was minimal
- Overtime paid for the time period was mostly due to additional hours spent on HRMS implementation.
**Action Steps:**
- Continue to monitor overtime use

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  HRMS BW

**Overtime Usage**

- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
**Overtime usage**
- Sick leave usage
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Worker safety

- Overall agency avg overtime usage – per capita, per month:  0.51

- Overall agency avg employees receiving overtime per month:  2.33%

**[DOUBLE CLICK ON THE CHARTS TO ENTER YOUR AGENCY’S DATA IN THE DATASHEETS]**

- *Statewide overtime values do not include DNR
- **Overall agency avg overtime usage – per capita, per month =  sum of monthly OT averages divided by number of months

- *Statewide overtime values do not include DNR
- **Overall agency avg employees receiving overtime per month = sum of monthly OT percentages divided by number of months

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

**Analysis:**
- We have revised our leave request form, which now requires employees to accurately reflect the reason for S/L use to enable more detailed reporting.
- HR has taken significant steps to enhance the agencies wellness programs, including promoting active participation  in the statewide Wellness program.
**Action Steps:**
- Fiscal will continue to provide a monthly sick leave usage report for team managers and Directors
- HR will continue to work with the managers of teams with higher than average S/L use to address potential individual issues.

**Sick Leave Hrs Used / Earned (per capita)**

**Sick Leave Hrs Used / Earned (those who took SL)**

- Sick Leave time period = July 2006 through June 2007

- * Statewide data does not include DOL, DOR, L&I, and LCB
- Source:  DOP Sick leave file

**Sick Leave Usage**

- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
- Overtime usage
**Sick leave usage**
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Worker safety

| Avg Hrs SL Used (per capita) - Agency | % of SL Hrs Earned (per capita) - Agency |
| --- | --- |
| 5.8 Hrs | 75.4% |

| Avg Hrs SL Used (per capita) – Statewide* | % of SL Hrs Earned (per capita) – Statewide* |
| --- | --- |
| 6.4 Hrs | 82.5% |

| Avg Hrs SL Used (those who took SL) - Agency | % SL Hrs Earned (those who took SL) - Agency |
| --- | --- |
| 8.4 Hrs | 105.5% |

| Avg Hrs SL Used (those who took SL) – Statewide* | % SL Hrs Earned (those who took SL) – Statewide* |
| --- | --- |
| 11.9 Hrs | 148.4% |

- Auditor’s Office

##               N/A

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency Tracked Data

- * There may not be a one-to-one correlation between the number of grievances filed (shown top of page) and the outcomes determined during this time period. The time lag between filing date and when a decision is rendered can cross the time periods indicated.

- Deploy Workforce
- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
**Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)**
- Worker safety

-               N/A

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

- Total outcomes = N/A
- Time Period = 7/2006 through 6/2007

- Total outcomes = N/A
- Time Period = 7/2006 through 6/2007

- Source:  Dept of Personnel

**Filings for DOP Director’s Review**
- Time Period = July 2006 through June 2007
- 0  Job classification
- 0  Rule violation
- 0  Name removal from register
- 0  Rejection of job application
- 0 Remedial action
**0  Total filings**

**Filings with Personnel Resources Board**
- Time Period = July 2006 through June 2007
- 0  Job classification
- 0  Other exceptions to Director Review
- 0  Layoff
- 0  Disability separation
- 0  Non-disciplinary separation
**0  Total filings**
- Non-Disciplinary appeals only are shown above.

- There is no one-to-one correlation between the filings shown above and the outcomes displayed in the charts below. The time lag between filing date and when a decision is rendered can cross the time periods indicated.

- Outcomes:
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on “productive workplace” questions
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
**Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)**
- Worker safety

- Auditor’s Office

## Deploy Workforce

- Outcomes
- Staff know job expectations, how they’re doing, & are supported. Workplace is safe, gives capacity to perform, & fosters productive relations. Employee time and talent is used effectively. Employees are motivated.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance expectations
- Employee survey ratings on 'productive workplace' questions
- Overtime usage
- Sick leave usage
- Non-disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition outcomes
**Worker Safety**

**Action Plan:**
-  Continue to take proactive steps to avoid workplace injuries.
-  HR is in the process of reviewing an on-line defensive driving course to be offered to employees by Jan 31, 2008.

**Analysis:**
- HR sends periodic reminders to staff on safety related items.
-  HR maintains a safety website with useful information pertaining to workplace safety items.

**Allowed***** Annual***
***Claims Rate******^:**
- Agency vs. All HR
- Management Report
- (HRMR) agencies
- *Annual claims rate
-  is # claims / 100 FTE
-  1 FTE = 2000 hours
- ^Due to natural lag
- in claim filing, rates
- are expected to
- increase significantly
- over time

**Injuries by***** Occupational***
***Injury and Illness***
***Classificatio*****n (OIICS)**
**event:**
- For fiscal period 2002Q3
-  through 2007Q2
- (categories under 3% or not
-  adequately coded are grouped
- into 'misc.')

- Source: Labor & Industries, Research and Data Services (data as of 09/03/2007 )

**Worker Safety: Auditor’s Office**

| Oiics Code | Oiics Description | Percent | Number |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 61 | Assaults And Violent  | 7% | 1 |
| 21 | Bodily Reaction       | 13% | 2 |
| 03 | Caught In Or Compress | 7% | 1 |
| 34 | Exposure To Caustic,  | 20% | 3 |
| 13 | Fall On Same Level    | 13% | 2 |
| 11 | Fall To Lower Level   | 7% | 1 |
| 19 | Fall, N.E.C.          | 13% | 2 |
| 22 | Overexertion          | 20% | 3 |

- Auditor’s Office

**Notes:**
HRMR Safety Report Overview

The HRMR Safety Reports are:
  - PowerPoint slides created by the Department of Labor and Industries
  - Created for each state agency that is reporting their employee safety program results bi-
    annually as part of their Human Resources Management Report (HRMR). 
  - Snapshots of five years of worker’s compensation claim data specific to that agency, as
    well as a comparison to the combined data for agencies completing HRMR reports. 
  - There is a two quarter lag at the end of the five years.
    This allows each agency’s payroll data to be entered into L&I’s computer system.  This
    payroll data is used to compute the number of workers per agency and quarter.

Definitions

Claim – When a covered worker sustains an occupational injury or illness, that worker files a
'claim’ for benefits.  A 'claim number' is assigned, and all wage replacement payments, medical
provider bills, etc, for that worker and injury, are associated with that claim number.

Report Detail

'Allowed Annual Claim Rate'
This chart shows your agency's rate of injuries resulting in allowed
claims, by injury quarter, for on-the-job injuries and occupational illnesses. The rate for all
reporting agencies is shown for comparison.
  - The rate is the number accepted claims per 200,000 annual worker hours (100 workers)

    Three rates are included in this chart:
      A)The total rate for all injuries resulting in a claim; the two groups listed below are
        exclusive of each other.
      B)The rate of injuries which required medical care, but no compensation for lost
        time.
      C)The rate of injuries which resulted in compensation for lost time in addition to
        medical care.

'Injuries by Occupational Injury and Illness Classification (OIICS) Event’
This section contains a pie chart which shows your agency's injuries by type* and a table which
shows the percent and number of accepted claims by OIICS Event description and code.

This information is useful in identifying what causes injuries so prevention can occur. Prevention
might include root cause analysis, education, and hazard mitigation.

* Injury Type is based on the 2 digit Major Group code of the Event or Exposure section of the Occupational
Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS). Groups with less than 3% of the
total injuries are combined into the 'Misc' category.

How to get this report for your agency:
All worker compensation reports will be available on the L&I website by the 20th of September or
the 20th of March of each year. The data will be provided in a PowerPoint slide to which you will
add your own analyses and action plans.

## Develop Workforce

- Outcomes:
- A learning environment is created. Employees are engaged in professional development and seek to learn. Employees have competencies needed for present job and future advancement.
- Performance Measures
**Percent employees with current individual development plans**
**Employee survey ratings on “learning & development” questions**
- Competency gap analysis (TBD)

**Employee Survey “Learning & Development” Ratings**

**Overall avg score for Learning & Development Ratings:  4.1**

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  2006 Employee Survey and Agency tracked data

**Analysis:**
- The agency survey results were higher than statewide averages in each category.
- 83 employees currently in an Auditor in-training program with the agency.
- Higher than normal vacancies in management positions have caused our percentage of completed plans to decrease.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to provide a monthly report to agency directors indicating Performance and Development plan status.
- HR will provide training to new managers on the PDP process and assist with getting all plans up to date.

**Percent employees with current individual development plans = 77.3 %***

**Individual Development Plans**

- *Based on 272 of 352 reported employee count Applies to employees in permanent positions, both WMS & GS

- Auditor’s Office

## Reinforce Performance

- Outcomes:
- Employees know how their performance contributes to the goals of the organization.  Strong performance is rewarded; poor performance is eliminated. Successful performance is differentiated and strengthened. Employees are held accountable.
- Performance Measures
**Percent employees with current performance evaluations**
- Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions
- Disciplinary actions and reasons, disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Reward and recognition practices (TBD)

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  Agency Tracked Data

**Analysis:**
- 100% of performance evaluations will be   current in July 2005, but has not been able to maintain that percentage.
- We have had an significant number of turnover in our manager positions this reporting period which has resulted in a lower than expected number of employee evaluations being completed.
- Agency directors have communicated their expectation that performance evaluations be completed on time.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to distribute a monthly report to agency directors indicating Performance and Development plan status.
- HR will provide PDP training to managers at
-      agency led supervision training beginning in
-      November 2007.
- HR will continue to provide assistance to
-      managers of teams with a low percentage of
-      evaluations completed.

**Percent employees with current performance evaluations = 74.7%***

**Current Performance Evaluations**

- *Based on 263 of 352 reported employee count Applies to employees in permanent positions, both WMS & GS

- Auditor’s Office

## Reinforce Performance

- The agency wide results were higher than statewide averages in every category
- 91% of employees indicated that they know how their work contributes to the goals of the agency.
- 56% of employees indicated that they receive recognition for a job well done, making this the lowest rate category.
- HR has developed a variety of tools for managers to use to recognize employees.
**Action Steps:**
- HR will continue to provide managers with tools and resources to effectively recognize employees
- Recognition ideas will be incorporated into agency leadership training at annual conference in Oct 2007 as well as agency supervision training beginning in November 2007.

**Employee Survey “Performance & Accountability” Ratings**

**Overall average score for “Performance & Accountability” ratings:  4.1**

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  2006 Employee Survey

- Outcomes:
- Employees know how their performance contributes to the goals of the organization.  Strong performance is rewarded; poor performance is eliminated. Successful performance is differentiated and strengthened. Employees are held accountable.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance evaluations
**Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions**
- Disciplinary actions and reasons, disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)
- Reward and recognition practices (TBD)

- Auditor’s Office

## Reinforce Performance

**Issues Leading to Disciplinary Action**
- N/A

**Analysis:**
- N/A
**Action Steps:**
- N/A

- Data as of 6/2007
- DateSource: HRMS BW

- * Reduction in Pay is not currently available in HRMS/BW.

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Dismissals | 0 |
| Demotions | 0 |
| Suspensions | 0 |
| Reduction in Pay* | 0 |
| Total Disciplinary Actions* | 0 |

- Outcomes:
- Employees know how their performance contributes to the goals of the organization.  Strong performance is rewarded; poor performance is eliminated. Successful performance is differentiated and strengthened. Employees are held accountable.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance evaluations
- Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions
**Disciplinary actions and reasons, disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)**
- Reward and recognition practices (TBD)

- Auditor’s Office

## Reinforce Performance

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  Agency Tracked Data

**Disposition (Outcomes) of Disciplinary Grievances**
- Time period = 7/2006 through 6/2007

**Total # Disciplinary Grievances Filed:  N/A**

**Disposition (Outcomes) of Disciplinary Appeals***
- Time period = 7/2006 through 6/2007

- There is no one-to-one correlation between the filings shown above and the outcomes displayed in the charts below. The time lag between filing date and when a decision is rendered can cross the time periods indicated.

**Disciplinary Grievances and Appeals**

**Disciplinary Appeals****(Non-Represented Employees****filed with Personnel Resources Board)**
- Time Period = 7/2006 through 6/2007
- 0  Dismissal
- 0  Demotion
- 0  Suspension
- 0  Reduction in salary
**0  Total Disciplinary Appeals Filed with PRB**

- Outcomes:
- Employees know how their performance contributes to the goals of the organization.  Strong performance is rewarded; poor performance is eliminated. Successful performance is differentiated and strengthened. Employees are held accountable.
- Performance Measures
- Percent employees with current performance evaluations
- Employee survey ratings on “performance and accountability” questions
**Disciplinary actions and reasons, disciplinary grievances/appeals filed and disposition (outcomes)**
- Reward and recognition practices (TBD)

- *Outcomes issued by Personnel Resources Board

- N/A

- Auditor’s Office

## ULTIMATE OUTCOMES

- Employees are committed to the work they do and the goals of the organization
- Successful, productive employees are retained
- The state has the workforce breadth and depth needed for present and future success
- Performance Measures
**Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions**
- Turnover rates and types
- Turnover rate: key occupational categories
- Workforce diversity profile
- Retention measure (TBD)

**Employee Survey “Employee Commitment” Ratings**

**Analysis:**
- See Analysis and Action Steps on Slide 17
**Action Steps:**
- The agency Strategic Plan is currently being updated and will be shared with employees to communicate agency measures for success.

**Overall average score for Employee Commitment ratings:  3.9**

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  2006 Employee Survey

- Auditor’s Office

## ULTIMATE OUTCOMES

- 78% of turnover was for auditor positions
- AICPA Recruiting/Retention study indicates top reasons accounting professionals stay with their employer: (1) Respect for mission statement (2) career growth opportunities (3) salary (4) accessible management style (5) interesting/challenging work (6) flexible work schedule
- The agency regularly conducts exit interviews with feedback given to the Directors and Chief of Staff.
- HR has developed a variety of recognition tools that have been provided to managers to utilize.
**Action Steps:**
- Additional career tracks in areas such as performance auditing will continue to be offered to staff in 2007/08
- HR will continue to collect data related to turnover reasons through the exit interview program and provide feedback to the Directors and Chief of Staff.

- Data as of June 30, 2007
- Source:  HRMS BW

- Note:  Movement to another agency is currently not available in HRMS/BW

**Turnover Rates**

**Total Turnover Actions:  50                                    Total % Turnover: 14.3%**

- Employees are committed to the work they do and the goals of the organization
- Successful, productive employees are retained
- The state has the workforce breadth and depth needed for present and future success
- Performance Measures
- Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions
**Turnover rates and types**
- Turnover rate: key occupational categories
- Workforce diversity profile
- Retention measure (TBD)

**Total % Turnover (leaving state)**
- Time Period:  July 2006 through June 2007

- Auditor’s Office

## ULTIMATE OUTCOMES

**	**** ****Agency****	****State**
- Female	 60%	   53%
- Disabled	 4%	    5%
- Vietnam Vet	3%	    7%
- Disabled Vet 	    2% 	    2%
- People of color	17%	   18%
- Persons over 40	 48%	   75%

**Analysis:**
- The agency has actively participated in the UW Minority Career Fairs from 2004 to current.
- Agency HR staff met with DOP to discuss diversity recruitment to gain ideas and brainstorm methods for recruiting a diverse pool of candidates.
- Agency Affirmative Action Plan was completed in June 2007.
**Action Steps:**
- SAO is meeting with DOP staff to implement new GAAPCom recommendations.

**Workforce Diversity Profile**

- Employees are committed to the work they do and the goals of the organization
- Successful, productive employees are retained
- The state has the workforce breadth and depth needed for present and future success
- Performance Measures
- Employee survey ratings on “commitment” questions
- Turnover rates and types
- Turnover rate: key occupational categories
**Workforce diversity profile**
- Retention measure (TBD)

- Data as of 6/2007
- Source:  HRMS BW

- Auditor’s Office