♪ ♪ ♪
Can Kyle here. >> I can hear Okay. And soon
the public can hear chomping on popcorn too. This October first 2025 regular meeting of the Fairfax County School Board administration committee will come to order.
>> This is the first meeting of the administration committee ever. Mr. McKenna's submitted a written request to attend this afternoon's meeting virtually due to a personal conflict. ACS,
transportation challenges and is attending tonight's meeting from the Springfield District in Virginia. All those in favor of approving Mr. McDaniels request as unanimous for board members present, Mr.
McDaniel, we heard your audio ready and see there. So we know that you're able to join us. We're going to get started. I want review the
agenda and just kind of like table set for the year. So in theory, this committee is designed to have for
productive meetings a year. Hopefully productive. And we might add a 5th if we need to to like finish up work or whatever. But there's
basically 3 charges for open session, one charge for closed session, which will have to talk to each of you about. Outside this meeting. The first charge which we have
materials for today. As well as decision points relate to the performance evaluations of specific school board office
and school board member staff. When I say specific, I mean, positions that are that do not exist elsewhere in the school division. In the school board
member office that would include staff aides, staff assistance and directors of district operations. In the school board office that would
include the clerk and deputy clerk. This also includes the auditor general, although the auditor general's evaluation will still be conducted by at least in the first part by audit committee before it
comes to the full board. So that's kind of like the purview here. We're not touching employees who have comparable roles elsewhere in the division. Like the technical positions in the
school board office or the senior executive administrative assistant position because those have to be reviewed in the same way that other comparable positions or review throughout
the division. And so we have 3 decisions today. If this is the path we want to go down. The first decision is around
the evaluation calendar. Several board members have expressed an interest in ensuring that the evaluation cycle for employees that we manage follow the board's
cycle of tenure on the board so that we're not picking up halfway through the year and completing. Term without finishing evaluation cycle for
unemployed. So this would move you'll see in the agenda. There's a proposed performance evaluation calendar set to the calendar year 26 versus the current. 25 26 school year
performance evaluation. The next decision point. Relates to the framework. And propose changes of the evaluations. If
you've done an evaluation in the system for an operational employee, I think everybody here has. You'll note that their generic and they are not specific to the employer, the
duties. Well, you can give an OK review that way. Several colleagues have mentioned that something that goes through the responsibilities based on job description of the employee would be more
beneficial for professional growth of the employee and for assessing the work done by the employee. So will make some decisions on that front. And
then the 3rd decision point would be around. This took the longest time as were meeting in October, not August or September. I spent the last a month and a half. Developing.
What could be the proposed framework for each of these. What I described as the specific jobs and the school board member and school board office. So that includes. The
standards and indicators for that position based off of their job description. It also includes a sample, personal assessment, self-assessment
brother. And then the >> Scoring Matrix 4. The board member to use when conducting that evaluation. And what
those. Matrix is wood would mean so all If we finish all of that, basically what we will have done is we will indicated here is the new
timeline for evaluating the specific employees. And here is the way that we will evaluate them. And then that can be rolled out to employees after the board approves. It obviously the full board will have to prove anything that we
do here. So we would send this on to the board for discussion. May be the work session or a regular meeting depending on what the chair and vice chair think. And then we would proceed from there.
The goal for this is that we wrap this up. If we need time to vote at the beginning of the next admin committee
meeting December. That's okay. If we don't get it wrapped up this year than we're pushing into the evaluation cycle that that we're discussing today, which begins next year. Any questions about that General
framework before we just start the conversation, Mr. know. >> Should the timeline? Would you envision over these the warrant that? I would
committee and board subsequently, we do is going to become effective for the following year. >> The evacuation for for
calendar year 26. a 26. What's clear? 26. Well, we are in school year. 25 26 right We're endeavoring to potentially not
do. The evaluation is based on school. Your school you about because we don't by. you want to do it from January to December December will you'll see more specifically what that means? When we look at
the calendar part time in terms of future meetings, there's some stuff that Dr Anderson has already worked on, that we will be talking about as well. I think we're doing that. The first meeting of the New Year. Which is an
employee handbook. We have an employee handbook. But anybody who's worked in the school board office or the school board member office knows that there are a variety of things that are unique to the
experience of those employees. And so this would be like a supplement to handbook that we have to create and then bring that to the board again approval. And then the 3rd topic is topic for closed
session Dr. Anderson. >> Thank you. I do want to say I'm glad that we're doing this and I did have a chance to go through all of the documents
that he is just a couple of overall questions. What did you develop all of these on your own? OK? So you've been a busy 6 weeks of getting it
together before our first meeting. I do think because there's a lot here and I would love to make sure that we have
our colleagues eyes on it that we should have a work session. I have to soon as possible. So we can put this fun new business for December. So this can get going just kind of
going through this and that a little bit. I went through this. A lot of it I'm fairly satisfied with much of what's here. It made me wonder we're going to need 2 hours here
today to push this forward. But I do that. We need to make sure that we get other people's input and to this document. But it's a great step. But what we've been talking about for a number of
years, particularly when you come in in January as a new member. There's no way you're going to be able to evaluate anyone in the next 6 months. And now because we have staff
aides that whose tenure and with your tenure. This makes much more sense. So I I'm in high support of the timetable and for much of it to get my
feedback is going to be fairly small. But overall, I'm very supportive of what's been generated here. I think the
biggest thing to say is that there is no time in the. >> The work session schedule for the remainder of the calendar year. So we are scheduling right now into the beginning of next year. So if
we want to we need, we probably need to send Mister email to get responses from individual colleagues we can split up the the group and determine whether or not we can touch base with with our
colleagues to get the feedback that we need in order to to make any changes that are necessary in the next admin committee and then get it to the full board. So I just want to let you guys know. For
everything for the remainder of the calendar year. >> All right. Well, I can come up with a framework of the types of things that we see that because the big ticket thing here. The thing that took the longest was taking
the job descriptions and matching it against. Proposed standards. And so I think that's where the meat and potatoes it's going to be for people's thinking. The rest of it is all very
straightforward. So when we go ahead and look at the first decision point. Mr. Grant. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
by the I that's where you work. gets. But, you know, I get the specifics of this one. got to the U.S. yesterday and began reading at U.S. I got this is a lot of work and done
all of or that attendees. I need to get acquainted with that. >> I learned from the governance committee. If you don't bring the work it can take for links to get something So I thank you.
Kudos to you. >> And you know, going through these on ask my staff members to stand and the stand. I have to look through those and whether they provide any
feedback. Any suggestion, any comment to the So in that regard, we intending on be asking our staff members with
Rtc something missing. One the things something for us to consider is I will say this. But in past conversations about the superintendent's evaluation, we've been. >> Wrists slapped by members who have thought that the superintendent know interest
in their own evaluation. So I think it's probably worth something from board members to consider whether they think it's appropriate to have their staff provide input on their own evaluation. >> I mean, I have already done
whether it was missing anything whether they see something different. I don't the coast on do work every day and the day tomorrow.
>> As it gets up to the board member, they want to engage their staff on that front as well. Thank you. Mr. Anderson chair enters all right. So the first decision point we've
got, if you open the >> current timeline, this is the timeline that is generally used for operational and instructional staff. In the
division set school-year calendar. And so in. Transpose this into a calendar calendar calendar year calendar,
rather, we removed the instructional employees from the quote, unquote, calendar year calendar because we don't have instructional employees.
And we took the same general approached a timeline. Put it on a calendar years. So the
January to Marcperiod would be when school board when these specific school board office and school board member employees. Have there. Some of
the valuations cycle and the details are shared out. And in March at the by March, 30th, the school board office and
school board member employees hired after that date. Would receive a truncated mid-year assessment from July to November. Instead of like a formal. And if your assessment
like everybody else. And then by April 10th. Employee Self assessments would be do and any kind of goal setting conversations that board
members want to have with their direct reports. What happened at that time as well? By July 10th. The mid-year assessments are do and should
also be related to the employee. Areas of improvement areas of praise, etcetera. And
then between up to October, 23rd would be when the summit evaluation and conferences or do for school board office employees. In other words, this is when you're doing your end of your evaluation for the
employee. And it's designed to be late October because November is a tricky month for everybody. But our goal is everything in November's
wrapped up all of the evaluations are wrapped by November. 20th so that by November, 30th, any employees who are running on an annually recurring contract. In other
words, staff assistance, staff aides and directors of district operations are notified by November 30th, whether their contract is being extended for another year. Again, some of these
things are unique to these employees, but that's the gist of it, Dr. Anderson. >> Thank I just want to make sure I can from what share the
periods in between each kind of set of activity. you saying that mirrors what would be happening over the school year calendar for other employee? So you'll have the same kind
of stretch between your goal setting in your mid year and your end of the year again, I think this timetable works really well. I wonder has age
are reviewed any of these yet? >> They have. They have provided feedback but they partnered on providing all the materials that we needed. All other. >> So that's good. And all of
our employees, our annual except for me, I'm the only one in the school. But office who doesn't have an annual employee. That currents that I well, there's also outside of school board member school
board member staff. >> The others, the >> the >> administrative assistant and the other technical positions in the right word officer also. >> Right. And we don't have
any changes for those because they're e they do have have shown the division as a board member who did share.
>> hesitation about having the superintendent develop. >> You know what her evaluation would look like? I think these are very distinctly different circumstances because we have
indicators by which, you know, the code of Virginia requires that we follow. So those performance standards are not negotiable. This is no. We're starting from scratch. I would love to have the opportunity. And I do agree with you. We
all have the opportunity to put it in front staff, an order to get that feedback and that could come through us. But I don't think these are
like activities. These really loud. But I think this
timeline is really good. I just want to mention because we've had this issue come up. Probably not 3 years now, the
November 30th time table of if you're not going to be we. >> We instated for the next year that you have a month to have that determination.
>> And there need the need for some backfilling in between these dates like if we're saying it's November, 30th, then a charge that the letter that goes out to all of those staff members has to go out by
this state. And so on. things that have to happen in order for that November. 30th date to work. >> Here's my wondering because I think we have this now with some of the staff and maybe
it's been corrected, sense the first term. Typically a toss sends out little reminders to program managers, primarily, you know, principles of
cetera. All of this is due. This is due. This is due. We have not been part of that as a whole. Will that be a consideration for these little things to be automatically
sent through my pde, which I imagine would be. >> They're actually these documents are. >> There might be a different platform that is used, but there will be a platform that
similar okay. Yeah. According to William. Mr. Salmond. >> Discussion the pops. This
is where the closest and discussion in one these. These I want to hear from I want you comment, Sir. One year contract versus somebody being on at. We simply it's the same
thing. Just wanted to show to happen from what? He can. >> I I can can even get you the briefings that provided guidance. I think those were
also circulated when the new board began. >> I'm so sorry. Yes, if that's the case, then should we? Have some sort of asterisk
in this? Because this seems as outline shows that you have to make a decision by November November 30th that you couldn't release someone. At any other point throughout the year. You could.
>> November 30th is just a you know, they have to do an evaluation of your employee. You don't have to who's going to tell you that you have to your board member. We are the
top of the food chain. But you should do an evaluation of your employee. You could wait until November December, 30th to renew your school, your staffers contract. You shouldn't. Because that's
mean. So we're just simply suggesting. These things. >> And I guess onethe ways that I also see evaluations,
it's a protection for the employee as well as and the system. Could we not make that commitment worse? You're saying from your company could. But I mean, we've had these conversations before
around. How do you police? >> Board members, action like that. The voters do that. Yeah. So kind of like, you
know, when we did impacted the >> advisory Committee handbook. A lot of it is just like encouraging board members to Do X, Y and Z because these have been found to be beneficial. Best practices.
So, you know, I think we can have the Vision Council explain to staff why it's important. Too. Join everybody else and doing these
evaluations every year. Which I think would be beneficial. Any further comments about the timeline.
>> Time now fight to me. We make a motion to accept or to advance to the full board to advance? Well, we would have to accept the timeline and advanced to the full board. Yeah. Do have one question to
what auditor general would she be on the same timeline? >> She would. And as the timeline notes, that process would be started with the audit committee. And she
already knows. And already discussed it with perfect. Yes. Some make the motion. And I second. Motion by miss by
Chair Anderson second by Mr. Moon, all those in favor. That's unanimous for board members present and on the Internet. The second is. The
framework. So if you look at the current all 3 of these documents are identical with different titles that are shared in this part of the board. Docs. The assessment
for the mid-year, the self-assessment and the Summit of Assessment that we provide staff are identical lacking detail. If you're an agenda
item. 1.0, 0, 3, the documents or call 2025. 26 current assessment from mid-year current assessment Self current assessment form. Some
those documents are all identical with just a few words changed here and there depending on what the assessment is for. And board members have complained that they're lacking in specificity
for the jobs and therefore don't do a good job for professional development of the employee or for accountability. The decision point here is to replace the
generic evaluation framework for these specific and SBM Employees with job special with a job specific framework.
And if we approve that, then we'll go on to a discussion of the job specific frameworks which are iterated out. In 1.0, 0, 4, on board docks. So
if nobody wants to argue in favor of keeping the generic evaluations than we can take a vote on it and move on to the
longer topic of 1.0, 0, 4, >> The mission, though, whether the under 1.4 1 point with 1, 1, 0, 3, is the current generic assessments.
And if we choose to go with something more specific to the job we would vote to replace it with something more specific and then we would discuss what the most specific. As for the 3rd
action today. we do to improve? Cherrie Anderson? >> I would make a motion to go
ahead and support moving forward to look at that. More job specific. Dr Anderson.
Second. USP to the motion. All those in favor. That's unanimous for board members present and virtual. All
right. >> So in moving on to the proposed assessments. Let's just take a look at as an
example. Join me in clicking on the 2026. Proposed assessment for the school board to should be like the
4th document that you see. I entered it is moving a little slowly, but it's loading. All right. So this is divided, I think, into 5 parts. Part one,
it's just like an introduction to what this is. And this is the same for all of the different jobs. That we would be assessing part 2 provides
the performance standards. Indicators and a scoring rubric. When when a supervisor
does an assessment, they're not scoring somebody based on an indicator kind of like we do with the superintendent like those specific things that the puts in there for indicators are suggestions of
things to think about when you're considering that standard. So we could add 50 things to a standard. If we want to. It's just 4 the board
defecation to know. What does this mean? What are the types of things that are included in the standard that I should be thinking about? You notice standard one is administrative
in office support and it says the standard is the provides administrative and clerical support to efficient daily operations of their school board member's office. And
then the types of things that are included. As a sample within that standard are iterated out as the performance indicators. And
then after that. There's a performance rubric that tells you. What somebody who's highly effective, what somebody who's effective, what some of these approaching effective and somebody who's
ineffective. Would be characteristic of. And so. A supervisor would use each of these standards in their evaluation of that person. So
for these individual board member employees, it just be the board member. But for the clerk, deputy clerk Auditor general, it would be every board members doing this
similar to how we do with the superintendent. And then those would be combined for it for a group and then finally, if you
go to the end of the indicators rubric. There is a note about what documenting performance looks like, the types of things that should be
gathered for an assessment. And then there is a a a self-assessment that would be turned into a form for the employee to fill out. And then
finally, number 5 is the evaluation that would be completed by the board member in developing their assessment.
>> And the performance evaluation. I guess you call the who drink. It's something I wrestle with every year. Even with, you know,
superintendents. In a people me have individual board members may have different expectations from there. The about the a performance from
their staff members. Some buy effect could could be different from somebody why someone is highly him. I thought so, you know, for the
you know, I would high expectations for my staff. You know, trying to see someone C my high expectations might be much harder to come by that
and some other board members was expectations. Might be. And I don't have a different from mine. So that is we are I? Stronger lot of times with
that. I am being when I put some on and keep a certain. Rating. If I can do some reading with that, I'm being
really To the person because because I'm looking at news for all of us high were not evaluated each other's. >> Employees, Heidi, looking
at, I'm looking at right there. I think he'll good as you say. Yeah. Want to put it on line. And members priority and are never that exceeds
expectations. OK, when I'm behind expectations, difficult if takes that's where. Unrest
or what we're not competing on the and I'm not getting any performance east of that and east and I hope for the whole
free. He said members not share ratings with each other days. It employee document, it employed act. And that's what I'm saying. You believe. But you know, play him, please
come talk to each other. And that's where. Personally I'm gonna struggling with that. Miss Anderson, the dark Cherrie Anderson, the doctors.
>> One of the things that I think that we need to be careful of is is to Mr. Men's point. When we're talking about the performance rubric, I would want to make sure that that was used as a sample like
this is this is. How you could this. And give back all which so that it's not that someone walks in assumes that just because their labels labeled as effective for a project for
particular board member that that necessarily assumes that there only effective like a like sentence before that rubric or the sentence before in that part of the standard.
>> That says something like. How this and how that is. >> Change it from being of her friends revert to being a sample performance record and just change the title. That would probably be enough and
then adding some qualifying language in the introduction may be enough to to explain that their sample, you know, language language throughout rather than having someone be able to one to one correspondents. But if I got a
highly effective, this is exactly what they think so that the other thing that that does is if you have someone that is exceeding on almost everything except for one portion, like one tiny portion
of it, is that enough to bump them down to effective or is that some just an area for growth? The other thing that I want to make sure is that although we're looking at this and I think it's great. We should remember that some of
these positions are actually evaluated by the clerk, not necessarily bias. And so as we're looking towards those things, it doesn't necessarily mean that all of these are
going to be conducted by us. in fact. >> I think for the deputy clerk winds and just referenced is that the clerk should gather feedback from board members so I think that's the only one that isn't
managed by >> The and the other thing that we would have to do is similar to the way we conduct of the clerks evaluation this year. We would want in the same way we do with the superintendent's evaluation is
that we would want to probably codify somewhere are path towards collecting information from the colleagues and bring forward and that can probably be done with an srp related to
this just internally for the office as as leadership takes over. >> I make a suggestion that we could maybe adopt without.
Opposition. Where in these documents where it says performance rubric, we could add the word sample like we have 4, the. Indicators and
then underneath that in each place for each of these documents, it would say something it would say evaluations and this would only be for the jobs that are school board member specific right? Staff aides, assistance
and directors of district operations evaluations for school board member specific employees will vary greatly are based will vary greatly
based on school board, member priorities and judgment. >> You know, going to preface this by saying I have done
hundreds if not thousands of these evaluations during my career as a school principal. So I just want to share that. Evaluations as much as we try
to really standardized by having examples. We really try to ensure consistency by using data. subjective documents, period. There's no way around
it. There's really no way to identify that. My FEC requires that you lift 3 blocks and your effective requires that you live 5 blocks. We're not
going to argue that. So to me, it's inherent that these are implied. I don't think having it on not having it. None of that impacts for many of the
employees and by the many of the employees, I a friend to the staff aides because while we have this very broad, job description, people are doing very, very different things because that's what board member requires. And so
they'll have to use whatever that criteria is criteria is to make the determinations as to how they feel their employee is meeting their needs. That's just going to
happen because that that single employee who was doing that single job. So there's really no real hard, fast comparison between the 2. When
I see a space for us to not. To remove something from this document, I'm not against what you're saying. I'm just thinking that it's redundant in and of itself. I want to
understand a little bit more about the utility of a summit of rating. Again, this is someone who serves one individual and they're going to give feedback or not,
because there's also not nothing to compel them to even complete this. I'm trying to understand why we want to boil this down to a waiting and to have that one final number.
Similarly, as we do for the superintendent and principals and teachers, I see the individual. Components as outlined in all of these parts
as sufficient because you'll get feedback in each of these. I'm trying to understand why do we need a wrap-up? Because not everybody. In the July school board member in place where there's just one person.
Yes, do right? I don't know if that's super helpful. It is. That's smart. Say more. Now. It makes a lot of sense that that's redundant at the end.
>> OK, it's just one person providing the evaluation. It is redundant right with that. Okay. So you know, the thinking that got us there is and I started with the ones that were done by multiple
board members and then light it on my way out. I logic blind eventually. >> so at that would be one of my preference is I don't know if was a moving that from
individualized employees. OK, without objection, removing that section. And >> including just what does
do? Its part per 5, 0, K. At right now because still on and I do think that we should still include Staff, a staff
assistant and director of District Court operations. Okay. >> I would also fled the deputy clerk to find the one doing just absolutely in the evaluation. Sure that that is
as well. And that's over the 2 that it would be applicable for that I'm hearing right now are the clerk and the auditor General Ramey would have multiple feedback points we
need to find some way too. normalize. It was I'm looking forward to incorporate that. Yeah. Okay. I would advocate for. >> Keeping the language that I
mentioned to. That's Mr. Moons point because I do think that it's valid just as reminder to the employee filling out, we're learning about their valuation to know that this is going to look different from
person to person who has a different board members, their boss. It might not be.
>> Sure that the record reflects where it with hands, the other part with the boxes to fill in. I think Mr. In
next >> Question regarding I think document correction. I think it It's I think it's part for
heart full. Documenting performance 20 performance.
So. But that's imposing upon school board members to comment. Documents. >> In providing it's not imposing anything. This is all
suggestion suggestions. But I would say somebody was managed. Scores of people. If you want >> person who performs. Doing
an evaluation that is not based on documented evidence. Wait a minute. Somebody in the scent. Appreciate that. I know what it's time what I mean.
You know, end up doing isn't. >> May end up doing my staff first to provide, want to talk to have a in the that because I may not ready to be something that you think about
like I worked on that topic and they were really helpful. And I really liked how they laid out. >> Or conversely, I asked them for a memo about this meeting that we were having. And just missed the mark. Those are
examples of work products. It's not like you have to go and gather them. They can be part of your feedback because you've already reviewed them.
>> I do think that it's helpful. If if you had somebody that was having a little bit of trouble, figuring out where their ratings fell, I do think that having a generic document that talked about how to configure
ratings as part of some sort of board member took it kind of thing, even if you did, it is an Excel spreadsheet or Google sheet so that people could plug in their numbers if they wanted to. Not necessarily that it's a
cohesive number, but just gave them a way to kind of figure out at the end where their range fell. I do think that would be a helpful thing if you if you haven't necessarily managed to 10 people at the
end. Almost like a grading rubric, it is helpful for teachers. You know, managers of all varieties. The other thing that I would say is to Mr. Point. And to your point
about gathering information in the military has a very strong model with this related to having the board having the service member actually complete portion of the document sides. And so I do
think this is this can be a collaborative document with your staff member. And so you can have them have it be a joint effort to get to get to. Yes. So what are areas that
they find was where we're strong, where we're today. Thing usually people will die themselves out far more more than you ever can manage on your own. And so I think that having having those is a way
to check has a checkpoint at the end of the year is a really strong way to kind in encouraging a staff member to keep track of this and have it be, you know, when they when
they hear things back from different people and, you know, sometimes. Reading those areas of strength or hard. And so having employees understand where they can gather, some of
that information is extremely helpful. >> I just wanted to add something. There's an opportunity for us for this to be done. Evaluations are collaborative process ease. At
the goal. Setting discussion. That's when you can start on Earth. What are the things that are going to be utilized as the assessment because they'll do 1000 things? Yeah, you're not going to, you know,
pay attention to all of those things. That's when what it was important to you rises to the top. And that's when that conversation needs to be had. You know, if you're a person can stand, you know, lateness and that will be a thing and your professionalism. That's
one of the things I would add because I before that. But that conversation helps you to build understanding between the 2 of you in terms of what
will be expected before it is in November. So you'll have plenty of months in order to do that. And it's always going to be revisited because I think there's also a mid-year
that is here. So you have April and you have July in order to build understanding through the process with your person. >> Good thing I would add is
that. I've also been evaluated by lots of people and there's nothing worse than being evaluated and finding yourself at the end of the year and having somebody like I didn't like what you didn't. The
second month on the So can you say? Something I could have made it better months ago. You know, I agree with Dr. Anderson is coming about. It's
an injured of conversation that happens throughout the year. The other thing that I do is I just keep a folder of the things that I want to talk about like in the future. I do that for the superintendent to
like when we're doing I know Dr Anderson gets a binder. I keep a digital version of the same thing. So it's just helpful. I'm never going to
too much happens at the end of the year. We look back on what happened in the year and it feels like some of that stuff happened. 25 years ago. Are we good with moving this forward
to the board with the discussed and approve changes.
>> Can we take a deeper dive on the deputy deputy clerks and the auditor general's documents just to make sure that we're super clear because that those are the only 2 that
will require multiple inputs. The clerk and the auditor, John side, not the deputy clerk. Exactly the clerk in the OT.
>> Mr. First, which one do you want to look at? First point out that the clerk? We promise not to stare you. Well, we do
it. All right. So looking at the clerk again, we have the introduction that kind of explains everything. And then you've got the standards and indicators based off of the
job description. And then performance threw bricks. For each. And then. When you get
to the end of the standards and and indicators. Youve got documenting performance and so. This is similar board
members would be doing similar to what they do with the superintendent in that regard. Perhaps the board will ask for certain documents to be collected as part of the
evaluation. The evaluation is Helmand for the clerk by the chair and vice chair. So they would facilitate that. Then there's the self-evaluation
part, which is. You'll notice that a lot of the standard, right? So the self-evaluation. Is an opportunity for the employee to reflect on the
beach standard and discuss their areas of strength and areas where they think they might need to improve. And then finally, you've got the Summit of Evaluation Park Dr
Anderson. >> Just to get a confirmation, the indicators that are identified and each of the components. These are directly
lifted from the job description, correct? Some of them are you okay? Can you just walk? But they're also they're also samples, right? Because they're not the things that you're waiting.
>> It's similar to the superintendent violation of the standards are what we judge on. The indicators are things to start your mind. Thinking about that standard.
That's why their list of the samples. Because if you thought about the things that are listed in the job description, you could literally come up with if you
just sat there, you could come up with 150 things reach standard. That would make sense as part. It's it's a matter of what's important to you as a board member within that standard in judging some
of these performance. >> I don't have a thought right now, but I want to give it some more. Reflection. I think this would be a space
where as much as possible to provide examples, not just the sample of this and still very broad category, but some
specific some specific examples of what could land someone in these categories? Because again, now we have 12 people who are going to have 12 different perspectives as
much as we could tighten that up. It'll be a lot easier. mean, by that may give you an example from the superintendents. You know, when you've taking a look at the the goal reports that
standard, you know, that's the academic progress. It's completely black and white. If you are you making progress or you're not making progress. Which gets gray is we have 15
and I'm being really sure conservative here we have 15 different categories and which progress could be made is sufficient progress for an
effective? 80%. We've never had that conversation as What it all. So everybody's made their own evaluation. Maybe he's just the thing that is important to me. If that's
progressing, then that's good for me. I take a very different approach. I tried take a look at all of those data points and figure out where does it fall? You know, do we have more than half of
them moving and try to make some decisions? They're really also knowing that all of the data created equal. I'd like to get a sense of how can we hone in on some of those
things more specifically, but everywhere, right? >> That are black and white. a white it's not going to be black and white but a little bit less gray.
>> tell you why didn't The superintnt has an entire army of people that help her prepare for her valuation. Writing reports, gathering details, cetera. I don't think
anybody that LC that we supervise has the resources to do that level of gathering of materials to provide the evidence for something that is less.
>> And I do I agree fully. And that's kind. And that where I was going, why was going is how do ensure some fairness to the employee? So that what I am expecting?
>> Maybe it is so low here that they would never meet that. >> I just I'm looking for someplace offer a little bit of consistency and clarity
like these are the generic things that could make this person effective at their job in this under this standard because I think I've seen it play out very differently in
these last few years. Well, I mean, and I I'm sorry, I don't have And that's the challenge. Because even superintendent's evaluation, all of those indicators are not required by the state.
>> The indicators that are listed by the state are samples.
>> I want to revisit something that we had just kind of said that we were going to change. But I'm just want to reiterate that worse on this on the right track. We can't just eliminate part 5 from each one
cause. That is the summit of portion of the evaluation. So I understand what we're saying about. Eliminating some of the rating. But what is the deliverable that's going to
give in if we're if we're suggesting that we're going to eliminate. Averaging portion, I understand. But at some people be the same. It'll be the same under that you have
on the current valuation. If you go to. >> Agenda item. 1.0 interest. And I guess my question is. >> Are we? I thought that we
were suggesting that we are okay. So we're still exist, suggesting that we're going to utilize the same form. No. >> I'm just saying that in place of that thing for the individualized employees that
requires. The grit and everything else because I think it's right that that's not something that's necessary when only one person is doing the evaluation, you would end up with. If you look at one of
the current assessments, the last thing is recommendation recommended continued employment recommend dismissal. >> I agree. I guess my point
is in order to justify that information we're going to need. I mean, I I assume that you're ready. You are in agreement on this, but we're going to need some sort of document that actually is a
deliverable to the employee to be able so everything north of that. You're still marking somebody as >> highly effective, effective, ineffective, cetera. For each of those standard, I know. But
>> that is I look at I looked at that is kind of the directions. >> Right? Not what we're going to hand to the employee. So what is the deliverable that we're going to hand to the employee to have that final conversation at the end of the
year. >> It would be how you rank them for each of the standards. And if you want to provide a comment of yeas and nays. >> So we are going to probably develop something in the of of
the form just like this, but it actually would be more new. >> And then for the individualized people, it would have to end or like we have on the other evaluation instead of the thing that I
currently have in exact. >> I think that when we get to the point, I think that it would be if we move this forward to the full board. I think that it's important for us to. >> All the things that we've
talked about will be fixed before. Then. Dr Anderson. Kate, DeSantis has to share. >> But at the end of the day,
especially when we're talking about the at-will employees that are the board members, employees, they could go at any time with that evaluation.
I agree. I think the point is is that we can't assume that they're only work within within Lcps is going to be with us. So I think that it's not fair for them to not have
a document that actually survives us as board members, particularly if someone is looking to hire one of our staff members after we are no longer on the board. And
that's why I said this will move in my PD E because that's where the form would be where you have a history because we're not doing, you know, paper things and files anymore, right? I was expected
that they would be. >> Williams, Mr. Salmond been talking about a system that would help us. An electronic system it's different from
what is utilized in. That makes direct. Anyone else. >> The only thing I do think that it's worthwhile at this
point to not necessarily I wouldn't actually vote to approve these today would want to have other move them. We're not approving them were just well up or furthering not for more conversation. I don't.
Yes, but I would want to get feedback from board members and maybe have us approve them at the next one to go to the full board. I don't the 2 rounds of feedback from board
members. One round of feedback. But with the understanding that will be closer to a yes at the at the next one, that it would be able to go for a vote faster. And that
>> I think what is being requested if I and I think this is my understanding is go back and make the clean up. What we have talked about and
then we will perhaps since we don't have an opportunity for work session in time this year doesn't sound like then we'll take this will speed up the board and we'll take this and have conversation with folks. Bring it back here at the next
meeting. >> To approve move forward. The final after we've had a chance to shop it around 70 remind me when the meeting
ends in the summer. Is this is October and yeah. But you have to just get this back to us electronically. December 10th.
So if we put in a new business on December 4th, we vote ourselves on December 10th and then we would bring it back to the full board to actually vote on approval on December 18. That's fine. And don't
give us enough. as I'm typically against putting something on new business that is not going to be available for the community view. >> This has nothing to do with
the community I'm fine with just posting it as an item because by this time we would have shared a slimmer just and not just the board, but also with staff. Obviously, you're
getting all the feedback and I will call Christina to ask you, what are your thoughts about this in the next few weeks and happening? out will
say as they just brought it is. >> More helpful for me for it to be more to my job description. That's actually something that I found to be difficult as the clerk is that
it is very nebulous and it doesn't necessarily align with a lot of what I do. And so when even when I've gotten feedback from board members on my last evaluation, there were
times when like. Okay, but it would have been really helpful if I could get more boards specific related to the job. And I think that would be helpful. I can't speak on behalf of the deputies, but I can say evaluating the
deputies. It would be more helpful. It's very nebulous as well to when I try to give them feedback based on the way the current Ebola. And that's what I was trying to mention
earlier because we can be anywhere about this because we're looking for that person to be everything to us. And what she's looking for is different than what I'm looking So having something
that centers us. As specifically as possible. And I think I'll take that on as my little side project, which is the crosswalk, the job just because you've done a whole
lot. I'd like to contribute in some way. And if you want to do it, I will a new way. But I'm happy to take at least the clerks and they have the word versions as well for sure U.S. walk that against the current
job description to see. Where can we have more specificity? Because if I'm going to raid her, not effective because she doesn't get me coffee air and we morning. Well, that's the
expectation that she even has. And that's a very, you know, facetious example. But I just wanted to speak to the very broad expectations that we can have. If this is not tightly
coupled to something that's going to thank all of us. My only concern is I appreciate you being willing to take on that work. I own my only concern is order to meet this
timeline. >> Then we would need to be able to take something to our colleagues quickly. So how would we make a decision as to and I do. I want us to have the conversation that's
necessary. So is it possible? >> The difficulty I think it's really that you'll find when you look at the job descriptions that you're not going to find things that are black and white or even close to it. They're all subjective. There's not something that's
like the deputy clerk is respond or that were recording. And this is where it gets back to what level of work is it to gather the
materials for an evaluation? Wright superintendent as a team of people helping them? Nobody else does. And so. That
are not subjective. >> Again, let me just give you some examples that I got the job descriptions in board docs as well. If you want to look at the jobs, are. >> Because some things that I could think you know,
providing training for the school board office staff, ensuring that you know, meetings a well-run. does that mean? Those are all subject of minutes are done within whatever the timeframe that's
already been laid out. Those are the things that I could speak to. Again. It's not going to be everything, but I liked was anchor in something. Yeah. I would also argue
quickly that we have not. >> Provided the direction to the clerk as to what the right now we have not provided the direction to a clerk is what we have approved training for our staff. So I think that
we're right now holding her to a standard that is is unacceptable to hold her too related to how that is working as our office is growing. So I want to make sure that we are
looking at this as an opportunity for growth. But I also want to look at it as an opportunity. So I think that what we would I think the type of feedback that you're providing is important and I
would want that. I think that. As as we're working together as a board to do this, I think that you bring that is part of Suggestion that you would
bring as one board member. So I think that going forward with the brief changes that we've discussed already and then moving it, sending it to the rest of our colleagues as a way and then assigning who's
going find go out with each and then Dr. Anderson, please bring your feedback as well as as a member of the board and >> the other opportunity for the full board to weigh in on whatever we come up with for the final thing that goes on
to the board for the actual vote in December. They'll have that opportunity to propose amendments and whatnot in December. If they want to change things are if they don't feel that their feedback
was accurately or appropriately reflected. >> Mr. Fresh. I would ask that the clerk go ahead and put it on the annual work plan for new business for December 4th.
And then vote first. Yeah. Let's vote. >> 2. Committee members. The chair of the committee will
divide up the board among members of the committee. To discuss. These. Performance tender indicators. Rupert
documents for the employees. To gather feedback for the next meeting. That is, in essence, how we're moving this
along is that. Secondarily? At the next board meeting, we will gather all the feedback make appropriate changes and move a final product along the
board with somebody like to move that motion. That's coming next committee meeting. The move up. Great. Is there a
second? motion by Mister McDaniel. Second by chair Anderson. >> I'm not going to support that because I think we should do some due diligence and take
a look at the at the job description in order to know that we're moving forward, something that is. As
comprehensive as possible to colleagues. I mean, we just heard from the clerk right now that that would be a helpful thing, moving it without a quick review for me, doesn't mark? >> We're not moving without a
quick review. >> Asked that I bring my review outside of the conversations with other colleagues. >> Well, I mean, it's part of our conversations generally.
And then we vote on moving at 4 with those changes, right? But when I >> whom Obama signed to, I can't say this is what this committee has decided. I could say this is what the committee
has and this is what I'm proposing. I don't want do that. least that's how I understand point. We're not actually moving forward with any of these because we we have already said that we want
our colleagues input. So this is the opportunity to provide input. And I am looking at my opportunity to provide input on the specifics the same way as I'm looking at the other colleagues being able to
provide that input so that that was minor. >> And then based on whatever we bring back individually for. At its. And move on to the full board, the board and
then judge, whether they want to move in that direction. All those in favor of the motion on the table. Mr. Rudd annual Miss Anderson, Mr. Modi,
myself opposed Dr. Anderson motion carries all right. So just to recap. We've approved encouraging the board to consider changing the calendar
for the evaluation cycle for these specific employees. We've approved generally. Moving to a more specific evaluation, then the generics
that are currently used and we've approved a request that members of this committee, which the chair will divvy up. We'll be in touch with. Other board members who are not on this committee together.
Input. They will bring that input along with their own input on the specifics to the next admin committee meeting. I would prefer it if people
would give people at least a week in advance of that meeting. So by December, let's say by December 1st, if people could have their feedback from
colleagues and December 10. >> Some are 10th at 4.30. So we we have. Now that December
17th, I think. So board member committee members would bring back their individualized and crowdsourced for lack a better
word feedback from colleagues. For discussion by December. First for the December 10th Committee meeting because it is a lot. I mean. I provided one set of documents and this
is from one person's thinking. So it's a lot. It could be potentially be a lot of information to review in advance of that meeting. So the earlier we get it, the better. And then we will endeavor to put the agenda online with all those
materials like the day at on December second, The day after we get back from people. >> And I want to confirm that we're going to head in putting on the annual work plan for 12
Florida. New business for 12, 18, a vote yes on this. And if we don't get there, we don't
get there. The only ever have 2 meetings in the right >> Previewing the next
conversation. Which we may or may not get through in December, depending on how much time it takes us to kind of gather all the feedback and
make sense of it. I added the current Fcps employee handbook to board docs. You can see it there. And the hope is that we
can develop a supplemental handbook. It doesn't have to be long that addresses the unique. Aspects of work in the school board office or for a school board member. So start
thinking about those and I know Dr Anderson and Rob and worked on this a bit. Previously. So maybe you could send what you've got and we can put it on board. Docks to spark the conversation. We're
just gonna be mindful about. Things that would be better served for closed conversation, Cherrie Anderson. >> The only other thing that I wanted to mention is that the office is still working on
finalizing the U.S. up for the staff members. I think that that will be this would be an excellent. addition to that as a P the SNP is going to be far more focused on actual things
that you know, specific term. I think that this would be the SNP is really just codifying the things that we're already doing. But I think this would be an excellent addition to
that, particularly as we look towards training. >> And there will likely be a closed session component of this conversation with
counsel. When we actually have the conversation because a big chunk of this is a topics are closed. Any questions. The
goal here is the end of this year of the admin committee. We will establish. The calendar, the evaluation process and materials. The
handbook. And then it's just about maintenance going forward unless the board sends other things to the committee. So that it continue to meet you know, quarterly fashion
and just ensure that. You know, did board members do the evaluations? Where are we on time with the other general? Where are we on time with the clerk was the clerk on time with the deputies. How do we
do with the non? Or that for the employees that are specific outside of outside of the office. That kind of
stuff. I think we're done. get you back almost an hour. Well, word you can imagine where we'd be if we didn't start
somewhere like it would take forever. We're adjourned. It's 05:40PM. Thanks, Mister McDaniel