Performance Based Management

Self-Assessment Report

October 2004

Home

Human Resources Management

Introduction/Background

Date of last assessment: October 2003

Departmental Overview

Laboratory Mission

The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center is the lead Department of Energy (DOE) laboratory for electron-based high energy physics. It is dedicated to research in elementary particle physics, accelerator physics, astrophysics and cosmology and synchrotron radiation, including biology, chemistry, geology, materials science and environmental engineering. Operated on behalf of the DOE by Stanford University, SLAC is a national user facility serving universities, industry and other research institutions throughout the world. Its mission can be summarized as follows:

• Perform world-class research in high energy physics, particle astrophysics and cosmology, and in the use of synchrotron radiation

• Provide accelerators, detectors, instrumentation and support for national and international research programs in elementary particle physics and allied fields that use synchrotron radiation

• Advance the art of accelerators and related devices through development of sources of high energy particles and synchrotron radiation, plus new techniques for their scientific utilization

• Advance the critical technologies necessary to maintain its leadership and excellence in parti­cle physics, accelerator physics, particle astrophysics and cosmology, and synchrotron radiation

• Transfer practical knowledge and innovative technology to the private sector

• Contribute to the education of the next generation of scientists and engineers, and to the scien­tific awareness of the public

• Achieve and maintain excellence in matters of environmental concern and provide for the safety and health of its staff and the general public.

Departmental Mission

The Human Resources Department at SLAC enables the scientific and educational mission of the Laboratory by guiding human resource matters with creativity and integrity.  We provide a full range of human resource services to the organization and all of its employees.  We are responsible for administering Stanford University Human Resources Policies within the SLAC environment and for assuring compliance with the Personnel appendix of our contract with the Department of Energy.  The Department includes 20.5 (full-time equivalent) employees in ten functional areas, including Employment, Benefits, Labor Relations, Employee Relations, Workers’ Compensation, Personnel Records, Training & Development, International Services, Housing, and Compensation.  (See the SLAC Human Resources organizational chart in Appendix A.)  This assessment provides information on the provision of those services based on three Performance Criteria mutually agreed upon by SLAC and DOE.

Identification of Self-Assessment Report Staff

Names, titles, affiliations of participants

Lee Lyon, Director, Human Resources

Lisa Mongetta, Manager, Staffing Services 

Performance Objectives and Measures

Human Resources management will monitor employee/customer feedback in order to ensure high quality service to its employees.

Performance Criteria:          1.1

The requirements, expectations, and preferences of customers are collected and addressed.

Performance Measure:         1.1.a                                                    (Weight: 32%)

Based on the analysis of survey data, the Human Resources Department will establish action plans to improve those areas that do not meet customer expectations.

Discussion:

In order to assess customer needs and satisfaction with the Human Resources Department, we asked all SLAC staff plus some users and visitors with e-mail access to respond to the following questions:

1. How well does Human Resources respond to your needs?

2. Are you treated respectfully and professionally by Human Resources staff?

3. Rate the overall Human Resources Department performance.

On each one of these three questions responding staff were asked to rate the Department on a 1-5 scale with 1 being outstanding and 5 being unsatisfactory.

In addition, all respondees were also asked to give their written comments to the following two questions:

1. What works well in the Human Resources Department?

2. What would you like to see improved in the Human Resources Department?

We included all SLAC staff in this survey in order to increase the number of respondents.  These questionnaires were distributed and collected by a non-Human Resources Department staff member who specializes in such matters.  He gathered the data, collated it, and presented anonymous numeric results along with the written responses to the questions to Human Resources Department management.

Findings:

Results from our customer satisfaction survey were received from 165 (11%) of our population of 1500 SLAC employees and 5 international visitors. Our effort to increase participation worked well since we more than doubled the number of returned surveys in comparison to previous years.

The quantitative results of this survey are displayed in Table 1. Results indicate that over 89% consider Human Resources’ staff to be doing an outstanding or good job in the performance of their duties.  Only one respondent considered the Human Resources Department’s performance to be unsatisfactory. As a point of comparison, the overall average for Human Resources Department performance was 2.2 in 1999; 2.5 in 2000; 2.2 in 2001; 1.9 in 2002; and 2.0 in 2003, and 1.7 this year.  According to our customers, we have performed the best ever in providing our services during this past year.

The quantitative data is supplemented by narrative comments made by responding survey participants.  In general, the Human Resources’ staff was very positively acknowledged for their responsiveness, knowledge, and caring. All of the service areas received numerous positive comments with Employee Relations and Training and Benefits leading the way.

In summary, SLAC employees perceive the Human Resources Department as performing extremely well.  In fact, we rated higher this year than any previous year.  The comments identifying areas for improvement will be evaluated and goals will be set in those areas we think are appropriate.

 Table 1

Performance Gradient:

• Unsatisfactory - no customer survey data is collected.
• Marginal - survey data is collected, but no action plans are developed to respond in needed areas.
• Good – action plans are developed that are directly responsive to valid customer feedback or overall customer feedback is between 3 and 2.5 on a 5-point scale.
• Excellent – action plans are implemented and measurable progress or action is taken or overall customer feedback is between 2.5 and 2.0.
• Outstanding – improvements are achieved which directly respond to the survey data or overall customer feedback lower than 2.0.

Note:  The original gradients had a score of “5” as the outstanding rating and “1” as unsatisfactory.  Our survey reverses them, so, after consultation with our DOE contact, I changed the gradients to be consistent with our survey method. 

Based on the above gradients Human Resources has earned an “Outstanding” rating in customer satisfaction, since our overall customer survey results are less than 2.   

Performance Objective:        2.0       HR Systems and Processes             (Weight 34%)

The Laboratory strives to provide efficient HR systems and processes.

Performance Criteria:          2.1

Human Resource systems and processes will optimize the delivery of services with respect to quality and efficiency.

Performance Assumptions:

The system or process reviewed will be characterized in one of three ways:  (1) it currently provides optimal quality and efficiency, (2) it needs improvement and project will be initiated or (3) it needs improvement but it is considered not cost-beneficial to initiate a project.  The Laboratory will identify the status of the system when first reviewed, will report baseline data at that time, and will report the results of either the improvement or the decision to leave the system as is.

Performance Measure:         2.1.a

The laboratory will evaluate HR systems and processes for improvements.

Discussion:

The Human Resources system selected for review during this self assessment period was the process for assuring that we properly withhold US taxes from the paychecks of foreign national employees. 

Results:

Our review revealed a flaw in our process that resulted in failure to withhold FICA taxes when we should have done so.  We concluded that an improvement was not only cost-beneficial, but was mandatory.  A working group was formed to address the issue.

SLAC Personnel Records Staff reviewed 34 foreign national employees who were exempt from some portion of United States taxes with particular attention to those who are exempt from FICA taxes.  Of those 34, we identified 14 in which the holding had been improperly executed. In all 14 cases, SLAC had not appropriately withheld FICA.

Corrective Actions:

As a result of these findings, two corrective action processes were put in place:  1) calculations were done to ascertain the amount of FICA withholding that should have been taken from each of the 14 employees’ paychecks.  The amounts ranged from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars.  Each employee was then called, informed of the error, and the Director of Human Resources and the employee negotiated a payback system, and 2) a working group consisting of SLAC International Services, Employment, Personnel Records, and Payroll staff was established to review the process and procedures for the handling of foreign national taxation in the Personnel/Payroll system.

Final Outcome: 

Payback arrangements were established with all 14 employees and those have been successfully implemented.

The working group established a new process and procedures for the handling of foreign national taxation.  This process was implemented as soon as it had been approved by all of the stakeholders.  These procedures can be found in Appendix B. 

A review, completed 8 months after the implementation of the procedures, found no errors in our FICA withholding for foreign national staff. 

Performance Gradients:      

• Unsatisfactory:  little or no effort has been demonstrated towards achievement of the performance measure.

• Marginal:  some effort is demonstrated, but the results fall short of the expectations for “good” gradient.

• Good:  one or two major systems or processes are identified for review, baseline data has been taken, and, if action is initiated, there is measurable progress toward improvement.

• Excellent:  if action was initiated, analysis against baseline data for the system or process improvement shows clear improvement or the system is streamlined, enhanced or eliminated or baseline data and the review show the systems meet our expectations.

• Outstanding:  in addition to the significant improvements in “excellent”, the completion of the project is ahead of schedule and the expected results are achieved or analysis against baseline data indicates the systems are excellent.  

Based on these performance gradients, we rate our performance as “Outstanding” on the basis that the needed improvement was identified and the changes made have proven to be 100% effective. 

Performance Objective:        3.0       Attraction and Retention of Qualified People

SLAC will attract and retain highly qualified employees, especially PhD level scientific staff and faculty, by offering competitive salaries and by maintaining a work environment which minimizes undesirable turnover.

Performance Criteria:         3.1   In Hire Compensation     (Total Weight = 34%)        

For the best identified candidate for each posted position, SLAC will offer total compensation competitive in the local market and consistent with internal equity.

Performance Measure          3.1.a:                                       (Weight: 14 %)

SLAC will offer an in-hire total compensation package sufficient to assure a positive offer acceptance rate for posted positions.     

Discussion and Results:

SLAC Staffing Services made offers during FY 2004, to 178 applicants.  Of those 178 offers, 7 were declined for compensation reasons:  6 cited salary specifically and one declined because we do not have a performance bonus program.  The other 5 declined for various other reasons.  The data indicate, therefore, that our offers were accepted 93% of the time overall and that only 4% were declined for compensation reasons.  We can conclude that SLAC and Staffing Services were successful in making offers that candidates found attractive.

Performance Gradient:

• Unsatisfactory:   Offers to candidates are accepted less than 50% of the time due to an insufficient compensation package.

• Marginal:  Offers to candidates are accepted at least 65%of the time. 

• Good:  Offers to candidates are accepted at least 75% of the time. 

• Excellent:  Offers to candidates are accepted at least 85% of the time. 

• Outstanding:  Offers to candidates are accepted at least 90% of the time. 

Based on the above performance gradients, SLAC has earned an “Outstanding” rating on this measure. 

Performance Criteria:          3.2a     Attraction and Retention of Staff

SLAC turnover, defined as the departure of any benefits eligible employee from SLAC for any reason, will be compared to the annual turnover for all of the remainder of Stanford University.

Performance Measure:                                                         (Weight: 10%)

The SLAC work and work environment will be sufficiently attractive that total turnover at SLAC will be less than the total turnover on the Stanford University campus.

Findings: 

The annual turnover rate for Stanford University, excluding SLAC, for FY 2003-2004 was 1313 terminations from an average population of 8,322 for a turnover rate of 15.8%.  During this same time period, the overall turnover rate for SLAC was 4.8% (See Appendix C)

Discussion: 

The SLAC turnover rate for this fiscal year was 70% lower than that of the main Stanford campus.  Clearly, staff are staying at SLAC at a dramatically higher rate than they are staying at the University as a whole.  We attribute this to the combination of the intrinsic nature of the work we perform at SLAC and to the work environment that exists here at the laboratory.

Performance Gradient:

• Unsatisfactory – SLAC turnover rate is higher than Stanford University.
• Needs Improvement –   SLAC turnover rate is lower than Stanford University by less than 5%.
• Good – SLAC turnover rate is lower than Stanford University by between 6% and 14%.
• Excellent – SLAC turnover rate is lower than Stanford University by between 15% and 24%.
• Outstanding – SLAC turnover rate is lower than Stanford University by more than 25%.

Based on the gradients above, we have earned an “Outstanding” on this performance measure.

Performance Criteria:          3.2b     Attraction and Retention of Staff

 SLAC will provide a work and scientific environment that will facilitate the retention of PhD level scientific staff and faculty at the Laboratory.

Performance Measure:                                                                     (Weight:  10%)

The annual turnover rate, excluding voluntary retirements, for PhD physicists and engineers will be lower than 8%.

Findings: 

The annual turnover rate for SLAC PhD physicists and engineers for fiscal year 2004 was 4.2%.

Discussion: 

The turnover rate of 4.2% for SLAC PhD physicists and engineers is quite low and again reflects the fact that SLAC performs cutting edge science that allows SLAC to attract and retain high level scientists and engineers.  

Performance Gradient:

• Unsatisfactory – Turnover rate higher than 20%

• Needs Improvement –  Rate between 15% and 19%

• Good – Rate between 10% and 14%

• Excellent –  Rate between 5% and 9%

• Outstanding - Rate below 5%

Based on the above gradients, SLAC Human Resources has earned an “Outstanding” in this category as well.

2004 Customer Satisfaction Action Plan Results

2004 Customer Satisfaction Goals:

Based on the nature of last year’s customer feedback, our only goal for this year in this area was to improve our overall services.  This goal was easily met since our overall customer satisfaction rating dropped from 2.0 to 1.7 on the 1 to 5 scale (see table 1).

2005 Customer Satisfaction Goals

Even though we achieved outstanding feedback from our customers during this past year, we will establish the following customer related goals for the next self assessment:

• The Benefits service area received very positive comments from many of its customers in the narrative portion of our survey. They also received some comments requesting improvement and the major theme in those comments was the accessibility of information to our employees.  Benefits will develop and implement a plan to make more benefit information easily available to our staff.

• Like the Benefits service area, the Staffing service area also received many very favorable comments in the narrative section and also some requests/suggestions for improvement.  One of the more frequent suggestions for this service area involved an upgrade of the Employment website used by both internal and external applicants for positions at SLAC.  The Staffing Services area will establish the goal to upgrade their website during this next assessment period.

• Our final customer service goal for the next year is based on feedback in our survey that our process for terminating employees needs improvement.  The goal is to clarify expectations concerning the termination process and to revise the procedures so that everyone involved is aware of his/her role and that all stakeholders in the termination process have their needs met. 

Overall Summary

In this assessment period, Human Resources has an overall “Outstanding” rating.  The quantitative ratings were the best we have ever received and once again reached the threshold for an “Outstanding”. In addition, all of our other performance measures also earned ratings of “Outstanding”.  We are extremely pleased with our assessment this year and plan on continuing this level of performance into the future.

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING FICA ELIGIBILITY:

 All paid staff must sign in with Human Resources (HR) in order to get on payroll, and as part of this process each must complete the Employee’s Tax Data form.  

• Employment Services (ES) handles the intake of all Employment Requisition hires who are US Citizens and Permanent Residents.  They are all subject to FICA taxation.  Other hires are routed through the International Services Office (ISO).

• Research Associates and Visiting Physicists are sent to ISO directly; others come from ES to complete the hire process.  ISO determines the FICA status for these individuals based on the information on the Employee’s Tax Data form.

• Graduate Students have their FICA status determined by Records, based on information on the Employee’s Tax Data form.

• In the event of a complex presence history, ISO and Records will consult with the appropriate expert in the Stanford University Payroll Department (currently Connie Reddy).

  • From the campus, contact will be added to the form for reference.

Implementation of the Employee Tax Data Form information:

• Upon receipt, Records will review the forms for completeness and accuracy.

• Records enters the proper tax code into PeopleSoft, including the appropriate notes.

  • This will also include any information on Tax Treaty eligibility with supporting documents attached.

• Records provides Payroll with a Personal Action Notice (PAN) with comments reflecting taxation instructions, including FICA status, marital status and exemptions. 

  • Payroll will note which statuses cannot be changed by the employees themselves after initial setup in the system.

Annual review of FICA Exemption Status:

• Each year in early December, Records identifies FICA exempt employees.

• Records provides Payroll with a list of individuals who must complete new forms.

• Payroll sends out notices to affected employees, who are instructed to return the appropriate form to Records by January 13th. 

• Records determines FICA status from the forms of Graduate Students, and gives all other forms to ISO for review and determination.

  • Records collects all returned forms, makes adjustments to FICA status as needed. Payroll receives the original forms and copies are put in the employee files.

  • Employees that do not complete and submit new forms by January 13th will become subject to FICA taxes retroactive to January 1st.

APPENDIX C

 TURNOVER CALCULATIONS

 Back to Index Page