Public Personnel Administration

"Public Personnel administration" involves,

the management of all an agency's human resources in a manner that assures the
best output with the least costly input, while protecting and enhancing the welfare of
the workers (Hanlon & Pickett, 1984).

Public personnel administration is the establishment and application of policies and

procedures for the procurement, deployment and maintenance of a public
organization's work force (Siegel & Myrtle, 1985)

Public personnel administration, simply stated, involves acquiring the best folks you

can find, paying them the least you can get away with, and matching the strongest
skills to your public organization's priorities.

THE AIMS OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION

1. Recruiting, selecting, and advancing employees on the basis of their relative

ability, knowledge and skills
2, equitable and adequate compensation
3. Training employees as needed to assure high quality performance
4  Retaining employees on the basis of the adequacy of their performance,
correcting inadequate performance, and separating employees, whose poor
performance cannot be corrected
5  Assuring fair treatment of applicants and employees in all aspects of personnel
administration without regard to political affiliation, race, color, national origin, sex or
religious creed.
6. Assuring that employees are protected against coercion for partisan political
purposes and are prohibited from using their official authority for the purpose of
interfering with an election,

Position classification.

The clustering of government jobs according to "their nature, qualifications required,

duties performed, and responsibilities assumed." Position classification is used to
provide equal pay for equal work for government employees.

Job description

A list of tasks required in an individual position. From a job description, a position is

classified in terms of its duties and responsibilities, but not in terms of the person
filling the position. Job description information is of three basic kinds:
 Information concerning the duties of the position, including the tasks ordinarily
assigned to the incumbent.
Information concerning the responsibilities of the position, including the degree of
supervision under which the work of the position is performed and;
The extent to which the exercise of the knowledge, skill, and ability necessary for
adequate performance of the duties of the position.

Recruitment

The process that ensures that adequate number of qualified persons will apply for
vacant positions in organizations. Recruitment is understood to include application,
examination, and placementas components of the overall government recruitment
process.

Recruitment may also include shifting an employee from one position to another'
within an agency or between two different agencies. The modern approach to public
personnel recruitment includes procedures commonly used in the private sector, such
as:

  utilizing the media

  using mailing lists from vocational and educational institutions
  circulating pamphlets, and
  developing a government career directory.

Selection

The essence of the selection procedure is to determine whether a given applicant is

suited for the job in terms of training, experience, and aptitude. Three basic sources of
information can be used ;

  Application forms
  Interviewing
  testing

The question of who makes the final employment selection from among the screening
candidates is critical. Despite all the techniques, the selection is an inexact science.

Job Evaluation

Job evaluation is the formalized system for determining relative value of all jobs
within an organization. All jobs are analyzed on the' basis of previously prepared job
descriptions. Each job is rated through the use of a job evaluation plan with the
purpose of establishing either specific rates of pay for each job or a specific wage
range or salary grade for each job.

Performance appraisal

Evaluation of an employee's progress or lack of progress. Measured in terms of job

effectiveness. There are two primary reasons performance appraisal systems are used
in modern personnel administration in both the public and private sectors:

Evaluations help clarify what is expected of the employee and, used properly,

strengthen and improve employee performance; and
Evaluations aid the personnel administrator in refining and validating personnel
methods and techniques, and they help '

Establish an objective basis for personnel decisions.

Types of performance appraisals include

 Person-to-person comparisons,
 Production records,
 Rating schedules,
 Graphic ratings scales
 The critical incident method and,
 Open-ended narrative appraisals.

Progressive discipline

A concept referring to the initial use of the least severe measure of disciplinary
action needed to correct unacceptable behavior. Progressive discipline
provides for an increase in the penalty with each subsequent offense. Some
first offenses are. Severe enough to curtail this process and result in an
application of the most severe form of discipline available.

Affirmative Action

A policy that advocates special efforts to hire minorities, women, and

members of other disadvantaged groups as a way of compensating for the
discriminatory practices of the past. Affirmative action is based 0n the civil
rights act of 1964. This act prohibited job discrimination on the basis of race,
sex, religion, national origin, age, and physical disability. The latter two
categories being amendments to the original act. The act also established the
equal employment opportunity commission (eeoc) to administer the law. In
1965, executive order 11246 required public and private employers to
establish affirmative action programs.

The EEOC may investigate charges and follow up its investigations by

bringing suit against the offenders. When investigating, the EEOC
concentrates on 'adverse impact' since "intent to discriminate" and "unequal
treatment" are difficult to define

How to Talk About Nonprofit Impact from

Inputs to Outcomes
Inputs, Outputs, Outcomes, Impact - How are they
Different?
Major donors, foundations, and nonprofit rating agencies such as Charity
Navigator and GuideStar have all made it clear that they want charities to
measure and report concrete results.1

The idea of measuring results is far from new but has taken on more importance
in the 21st century.2 Foundations and many individual philanthropists now search
for organizations that are data-driven and results-oriented.

Measurement Is Trending
Indeed, a new movement called effective altruism (championed by the ethicist
Peter Singer) has especially caught the interest of young donors and tech-savvy
philanthropists.3

Just think of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other philanthropists such
as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeff Skoll, a founder of eBay, whose
foundation supports social entrepreneurs. These philanthropists, using their
experience with the tech industry, look for data-driven causes to back with their
fortunes.

This new fascination with linking philanthropy to measurable results has landed
many organizations in the murky waters of program assessment and evaluation.
Most nonprofit professionals are not experts in measurement. But they should, at
least, be aware of the basic concepts. Also, fundraising professionals need to be
able to talk and write about results. But that is more difficult than it might it seem
since there is widespread confusion about the basic terminology.

Clarifying the Terms

One influential book in this field has been Mario Morino's "Leap of Reason:
Managing To Outcomes In An Era Of Scarcity." The book lays out a framework
for nonprofit organizations to do their work from conception to evaluation. Here is
a summary of the terms Morino says are crucial for all nonprofit program
managers and fundraisers to understand.4

Theory of Change: How change comes about.

The set of formal relationships presumed to exist for a defined population, the
intended outcomes the organization will strive to bring about, and the logic model
for producing those outcomes. A theory of change must be meaningful to
stakeholders, plausible, doable with available resources, and measurable.

Logic Model: What the program does and how.

The related parts of a program, showing how the program objectives, program
activities, and expected outcomes are linked. The logic model clarifies who will
be served, expected accomplishments, and how those will be accomplished. A
program is the products or services your organization provides to change a
situation.

Examples of program activities include classes, lobbying, public awareness

campaigns, performing, displaying, or protecting artifacts or animals. A program
might also provide food or shelter for the needy or recreational programs for
young people. A program is what your organization does.

Designing a logic model may seem intimidating, but there are many examples
and templates online to help.5

Inputs: Resources committed to the program.

Money, time, staff, expertise, methods, and facilities the organization commits to
bring about the intended outputs, outcomes, and impact. Resources can be
financial, but also the time of staff or volunteers. Expertise, such as a consultant
or a partner organization, can be considered an input. 
Outputs: What is counted.

Numerical counts of a program’s actions or products that were created or

delivered, the number of people served, and the activities or services provided.
For instance, a training program provides graduates. A particular effort might
yield information such as white papers or studies. A homeless shelter creates
filled beds. 

We usually describe outputs with numbers. For instance, "...we filled 96% of
available beds..." or "...our training program resulted in 95 graduates." 

Outputs are measurable and readily determined.

It's tempting to stop with outputs because they are easy to produce. You just
count. How many people did you serve? How many meals did you dish out?

But, your organization should try to get to the next level of outcomes and impact.

Outcomes: What the program wishes to achieve.

Outcomes are meaningful changes for the population served, such as anticipated
changes in knowledge, skills, attitudes, behavior, condition, or status. Changes
should be measured and monitored and link directly to the program. An outcome
is an effect your program produces on the people or issues you serve or address.

For instance, the result of a training program might be the number of graduates
who get a job and keep it for a particular period.

An outcome is a change that occurred because of your program. It is

measurable and time-limited, although it may take a while to determine its full
effect.

Measuring outcomes requires a more significant commitment of time and

resources. Plus, you may have to track performance over time.

Indicators: What helps the program to stay on course.

These are specific, observable, and measurable characteristics, actions, or

conditions that show whether or not the desired change has
happened. Indicators reveal progress during the program. If indicators are
positive, continue that activity. If indicators are negative, then it's time to change
course or introduce programmatic changes.

Impact: What effect took place because of the program

Impact consists of the results that are directly due to the outcomes of a program.
Results are determined by evaluations that factor out other explanations for
these results. Impacts are the long-term or indirect effects of your outcomes. 

Impacts are hard to measure since they may or may not happen. They are what
one hopes to accomplish.  

For instance, graduating from a training program may eventually lead to a better
quality of life for the individual. But how do you know? What are the indicators of
a better quality of life? How long will it take to see the impact?

What Nonprofits Need to Remember About Measurement

Charities often use the term “results” when they are talking about “outcomes” or
“outputs.” 

Be clear about what each word means and use them appropriately. Also, strive
for the highest level of those results that you can reach. 

Fundraising messages that motivate donors may read very differently than the
information you give to institutional funders in your grant proposals. 

When fundraising, you try to appeal to the hearts of donors while still backing up
your appeals with evidence that your programs do work. 

When writing grants, you can become much more specific by explaining
your methods, how you evaluate your programs, and what outcomes you expect.

The key to effective fundraising is to make sure that your charity can measure
outcomes. And to know at what level you are doing it. If the critical data exist,
then you can answer any question that might come up whether that question
comes from a foundation or a major donor.

Plus, all those data help determine what worked and what didn't. That's how you
improve your programs and raise money.

How Measurement Fits Into Overall High Performance

As crucial as a measurement is, it is only part of what sets off a high performing
nonprofit from one that isn't high performing.

The Leap of Reason Ambassadors Community has developed a framework for

high performance in the social sector. Especially useful is its section on how
even small nonprofits can and must understand how to build high performance
from the ground up. Leap of Reason's framework serves as a handy outline of
the "pillars" of high performance. Those pillars include: 

Pillar 1: Courageous, adaptive executive and board leadership (the preeminent

pillar)

Pillar 2: Disciplined, people-focused management

Pillar 3: Well-designed and well-implemented programs and strategies

Pillar 4: Financial health and sustainability

Pillar 5: A culture that values learning

Pillar 6: Internal monitoring for continuous improvement

Pillar 7: External evaluation of mission effectiveness6

Although many smaller nonprofits can be overwhelmed by this model, its authors
insist that it can be done, one step at a time.7

For nonprofits, measurement should be considered within the context of a model

such as this, not just because it's needed to apply for a particular grant or make
the case to a significant donor. If measurement becomes part of an overall plan,
it becomes more sustainable.

High performance can be achieved by almost any nonprofit organization.

Although small nonprofits and arts organizations find it more challenging to
express results in a data-driven way, they can develop ways to track and
measure almost any activity.

Once developed, these systems can produce information that should be

presented to funders, whether individual donors or institutional donors.
Organizations will be rewarded for those efforts. Donors want to see nonprofits of
all kinds make an effort to quantify and understand their effectiveness.
 Strategic Performance Management
System
The Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) is a mechanism that links employee performance
with organizational performance to enhance the performance orientation of the compensation system. It
ensures that the employee achieves the objectives set by the organization and the organization, on the other
hand, achieves the objectives that it has set as its strategic plan.

The SPMS Objectives are: (a) to concretize the linkage of organizational performance with the Philippine
Development Plan, Agency Strategic Plan, and Organizational Performance Indicator Framework OPIF; (b) to
ensure organizational and individual effectiveness by cascading institutional accountabilities to the various
levels of the organization; and (c) to link performance management with other HR systems.

The SPMS has the following basic elements:

a. Goals that are aligned to agency mandate and organizational priorities
b. System that is outputs/outcomes-oriented
c. A team approach to performance management
d. Forms that are user-friendly and shows alignment of individual and organizational goals
e. Information systems that support monitoring and evaluation
f. A Communication plan

More importantly, the SPMS complements the Results-Based Performance Management System that is
implemented by the Office of the President and that links organizational performance to societal goals. It is
also linked to the Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) that consists of the Productivity Enhancement
Incentive (PEI) and the Performance-Based Bonus (PBB).

The SPMS Process

The SPMS follows a four-stage cycle, consisting of the following:

1. Performance planning and commitment

During this stage, success indicators are determined. Success indicators are performance level yardsticks
consisting of performance measures and performance targets. These shall serve as bases in the office’s and
individual employee’s preparation of their performance contract and rating form.

2. Performance monitoring and coaching

The performance of the office and every individual shall be regularly monitored at various levels. Monitoring
and evaluation mechanisms ensure that timely and appropriate steps can be taken to keep a program on track,
and that its objectives or goals are met in the most effective manner.

Managers and supervisors act as coaches and mentors to provide an enabling environment/intervention to
improve team performance, and to manage and develop individual potentials.
 3. Performance review and evaluation
This phase aims to assess both office’s and individual employee’s performance level based on performance
targets and measures as approved in the office and individual performance commitment contracts.

Part of the individual employee’s evaluation is the competency assessment vis-à-vis the competency
requirements of the job. The assessment shall focus on the strengths, competency-related performance gaps
and the opportunities to address these gaps, career paths, and alternatives.

4. Performance rewarding and development planning

The results of the performance evaluation/assessment shall serve as inputs for the agency’s HR Plan, which
includes identification and provision of developmental interventions, and conferment of rewards and
incentives.

SPMS Rating Scale

The SPMS uses a five-point rating scale, described as follows:

Rating      

Numerical     Adjectival     Description

Performance represents an extraordinary level of achievement and commitment

in terms of quality and time, technical skills and knowledge, ingenuity,
creativity, and initiative. Employees at this performance level should have
5     Outstanding    
demonstrated exceptional job mastery in all major areas of responsibility.
Employee achievement and contributions to the organization are of marked
excellence.

Very Performance exceeded expectations. All goals, objectives, and targets were
4        
Satisfactory achieved above the established standards.

Performance met expectations in terms of quality of work, efficiency, and

3     Satisfactory    
timeliness. The most critical annual goals were met.

Performance failed to meet expectations, and/or one or more of the most critical
2     Unsatisfactory    
goals were not met.

Performance was consistently below expectations, and/or reasonable progress

1     Poor     toward critical goals was not made. Significant improvement is needed in one or
more important areas.