Phase 2 work level evaluation principles process overview
Download
1 / 43

Phase 2- Work Level Evaluation Principles & Process Overview - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 77 Views
  • Uploaded on

Phase 2- Work Level Evaluation Principles & Process Overview. HP Phase 2- Evaluation Methodology Flowchart. WLE Process Methodology. Step 1 - Standardised Data Set Step 2 - Work Level Evaluation Step 3 - Intra-Disciplinary Relativity/Consistency Review

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Phase 2- Work Level Evaluation Principles & Process Overview ' - stuart-nicholson


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Phase 2 work level evaluation principles process overview

Phase 2- Work Level Evaluation Principles & Process Overview



Wle process methodology
WLE Process Methodology

  • Step 1 - Standardised Data Set

  • Step 2 - Work Level Evaluation

  • Step 3 - Intra-Disciplinary Relativity/Consistency Review

  • Step 4 - Inter-Disciplinary Relativity/Consistency Review

  • Step 5 - HPIBB Oversight

  • Step 6 - Notification/Implementation

  • Post-Evaluation Appeals Process


Step 1 standardised data set
STEP 1 – STANDARDISED DATA SET

Scope and Purpose:

  • The Queensland Health Shared Service Provider (QHSSP) to check completeness of:

    • Work Unit Proposals (WUP)

    • Employee Initiated Applications (EIA)


Step 1 standardised data set1
STEP 1 – STANDARDISED DATA SET

Outputs

  • Standardised Data Set for each work unit including:

    • WUP

    • Role Descriptions

    • Merged EIA/ Redesign materials


Step 2 work level evaluation
STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

Scope and Purpose:

  • To evaluate proposed role descriptions against the Work Level Statements (WLS) and determine the appropriate classification level.


Step 2 work level evaluation1
STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

  • The work level evaluation methodology is premised on the Work Level Statements for each of the eight classification levels of the health practitioner classification structure.

  • The work level evaluation is predicated on a holistic evaluation having regard for the following elements:


Step 2 work level evaluation2
STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

  • Inputs – level of knowledge, skills and experience required including:

    • Role scope

    • Accountability of role;

  • Processing – what the position is required to do;

  • Outputs – defined in terms of responsibilities for which the position is accountable.

    These elements may be either

    • directly within the work unit; and/or

    • external to the work unit that provides a benefit to Queensland Health.


  • Step 2 work level evaluation3
    STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

    Work Level Evaluation Panels consist of a:

    • Discipline Panel comprising profession/discipline representatives, and one QHSSP representatives; or

    • Work Unit Panel comprising one profession/discipline representative, and one QHSSP representative, where evaluation occurs within the context of a multidisciplinary work setting; or

    • Combination of discipline representatives and QHSSP to meet the requirements of the evaluation process


    Step 2 work level evaluation4
    STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

    • Variations to the composition of Work Level Evaluation Panels will be determined by the HPIBB Group on advice from the QHSSP and/or feedback from the discipline as a whole.


    Step 2 work level evaluation5
    STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

    WLE Panels will undertake an evaluation process to:

    • Understand the scope and accountabilities of the role,

    • Consider its relativity to other positions within the Work Unit

    • Determine an HP classification level,


    Step 2 work level evaluation6
    STEP 2- WORK LEVEL EVALUATION

    Consideration given to:

    • Vertical (hierarchical) alignment of accountabilities with reporting positions

    • Horizontal alignment of accountabilities to ensure comparability and relativity with other HP positions in the work unit at the same classification level.

      NB: Clinical positions may be evaluated at the same or higher classification level to the management position to which it operationally reports


    Evaluation process guidelines general
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- General

    Where clarification or further information required, the WLE Panels will make enquiries with;

    • The employee

    • The work unit manager

    • Discipline leader (where the work unit manager is not an HP)


    Evaluation process guidelines general1
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- General

    • A WLE Panel may seek further input/advise in relation to specialised issues through discussion with:

      • Other WLE Panel members,

      • Discipline/specialty experts; or

      • Members of an approved Reference Group


    Evaluation process guidelines general2
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- General

    • The WLE Panels are not responsible for the creation of new Role Descriptions


    Evaluation process guidelines general3
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- General

    • WLE Panels to evaluate HP6-8 first

    • When HP6-8 evaluations complete, the Intra-Discipline Relativity/Consistency Review (IDR) Group (Step 3) will be convened to review HP6-8


    Evaluation process guidelines general4
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- General

    • WLE Panels to evaluate HP1-5

    • When all evaluations are complete, the IDR Group will reconvene to review the relativity and consistency for that discipline.

    • Internal consistency checks will be performed throughout the evaluation process to ensure consistency between panels


    Evaluation process guidelines data recording
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Data Recording

    The WLE Panel members will:

    • consolidate notes taken during the evaluation process into a Health Practitioner Evaluation Record

    • note the date of completion of the evaluation and their identities in the WLE database for use of WLET

      • The evaluation record will not show names of evaluators during the notification stage

    • ensure that information pertinent to an employees’ evaluated role is available upon completion of the Phase 2 Evaluation process


    Evaluation process guidelines evaluation outcome
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Evaluation Outcome

    • Where WLEP members cannot agree on a particular classification level:

      • The QHSSP team leader may provide some guidance and/or advice to the WLEP members.

      • The unresolved evaluation is to be referred to a second panel through the QHSSP team leader.

      • WLE panels may combine to discuss outcomes, and make an evaluation decision by the majority of panellists.


    Evaluation process guidelines employee initiated applications eia
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Employee Initiated Applications (EIA)

    • The EIA and Role Description will be considered together for evaluation purposes.

    • The WLEP will verify information provided and/or sought with regard for other Standardised Data Set enquiries and in the context of the Work Unit.


    Evaluation process guidelines employee initiated applications eia1
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Employee Initiated Applications (EIA)

    • Consideration of the two documents together may identify line/s of enquiry that the WLEP will direct to the employee and/or the discipline leader, and/or the work unit manager.

    • The role will be evaluated in its entirety and any points of difference between the RD and EIA will be documented.

    • WLE Panels will form an assessment for individual employees based upon an overall view of the material that was submitted.


    Evaluation process guidelines employee initiated applications eia2
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Employee Initiated Applications (EIA)

    • WLEP members will verify the accuracy of relevant material provided in the EIA and the WUP

    • WLEP members will record their assessment, based upon what has been able to be verified, in the Health Practitioner Evaluation Record

    • During the Notification stage, a final version of the Health Practitioner Evaluation Record will be returned to the work unit manager for reconciliation and generation into a new Role Description.

      • This is a separate local process.


    Evaluation process guidelines multidisciplinary
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Multidisciplinary Applications (EIA)

    • Disciplines are evaluated with a regard for the work unit as:

      • a single discipline or

      • a multidisciplinary work unit.

    • WLEPs may be convened for those disciplines that fall within a multidisciplinary work setting

    • WLEPs are given the Standardised Data Set for each discipline they are evaluating, so that they can evaluate in the context of the multidisciplinary WUP.


    Evaluation process guidelines multidisciplinary1
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Multidisciplinary Applications (EIA)

    • The Work Unit Panels will be expected to give consideration to the other disciplines within the work unit as they are evaluating.

    • Each evaluator should be able to recognise the levels of knowledge, skills, experience and accountabilities, and identify anomalies as they are occurring within the multidisciplinary work unit.


    Evaluation process guidelines reference group
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Reference Group Applications (EIA)

    The Work Unit Panels may initiate communication with a Reference Group to provide an understanding of:

    • the multidisciplinary operational structure;

    • duties and/or dynamics;

    • general information regarding reporting relationships: and

    • any other matters influencing the organisational context and/or the HP roles performed.


    Evaluation process guidelines reference group1
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Reference Group Applications (EIA)

    • Example of Reference groups may include:

      • Mental Health

      • Community Health

      • Aged Care Assessment Team

      • Oral Health

      • Population Health

      • CaSS and/or;

      • Other work areas determined by the HPIBB Group.


    Evaluation process guidelines outputs
    Evaluation Process Guidelines- Outputs Applications (EIA)

    • HP Evaluation Record for each role description

    • Discipline Evaluation Recommendation Report including;

      • Whole of discipline distribution of evaluated classification levels

      • Rationalisation for variations in terms of

        • Facility/work unit size

        • Geographical factors

        • Services provided

        • Work Unit staffing profile


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    Scope and Purpose:

    • To review the relativity and consistency of HP evaluation outcomes within a discipline across departments/units and Districts.


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review1
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    • WLE Panel members to come together jointly with members from the WLE Team to review the relativities and consistency of classification levels across a discipline or profession.

    • This group is called the Intra-disciplinary Relativity/Consistency Review Group (IDR ).


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review2
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    Membership:

    • Work Level Evaluation Panel(s)

    • Work Level Evaluation Team members

      • 2 WLET members (workforce)

      • 2 WLET members (management including at least one Health Practitioner)

    • Impartial Facilitator


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review3
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    WLET members review evaluation outcomes based on:

    • methodology and

    • content of the proposed role descriptions

      WLET members may seek clarification from the WLEP members in these areas


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review4
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    WLEP members are responsible for the evaluations

    WLEP members will provide responses to queries from the WLET members

    NB: Work Unit Managers and/or employees may only be contacted by the WLEP members


    Step 3 intra disciplinary relativity consistency review5
    STEP 3- INTRA-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    • When all enquiries from the WLET members have been satisfied, the IDR Group will collectively pass the evaluation outcomes to the Inter-disciplinary Relativity/Consistency Review (Step 4)


    Step 4 inter disciplinary relativity consistency review
    STEP 4- INTER-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    Scope and Purpose:

    • To review the relativity and consistency of classification levels across the HP workforce between

      • disciplines/professions,

      • Districts, Departments and

      • Work Units.


    Step 4 inter disciplinary relativity consistency review1
    STEP 4- INTER-DISCIPLINARY RELATIVITY/CONSISTENCY REVIEW Applications (EIA)

    Membership:

    • 8 WLET members (workforce)

    • 8 WLET members (management including 4 HP’s)

    • Impartial facilitator

    • The entire 16 individuals are present for this process


    Step 5 hpibb oversight
    STEP 5- HPIBB OVERSIGHT Applications (EIA)

    Scope and Purpose:

    • To oversee the Work Level Evaluation Project

    • To provide direction to the WLE Panels and WLE Team regarding process related issues


    Step 5 hpibb oversight1
    STEP 5- HPIBB OVERSIGHT Applications (EIA)

    Membership:

    • 11 Union members (QPSU/LHMU)

    • 11 QH members


    Step 5 hpibb oversight2
    STEP 5- HPIBB OVERSIGHT Applications (EIA)

    • Review Progress reports

    • Respond to reports of vexatious cycles

    • Review the HP Work Level Evaluation Final Outcome Report.

    • Seek further information from the Work Level Evaluation Panels where required

    • Request that the Work Level Evaluation Team reconsider its methodology to ensure that it complies with the guiding principles of Phase 2

    • Forward the final evaluation outcomes to the Director General for final approval


    Step 6 notification implementation
    STEP 6- NOTIFICATION/IMPLEMENTATION Applications (EIA)

    Scope and Purpose:

    • To provide notification of evaluation outcomes to:

      • employee (in all cases),

      • the Work Unit manager (for their work unit),

      • District Human Resource Management,

      • QHSSP and

      • Corporate Office

        NB: This must occur simultaneously to enable effective management of grievances and appeals


    Step 6 notification implementation1
    STEP 6- NOTIFICATION/IMPLEMENTATION Applications (EIA)

    Membership:

    • QHSSP

    • HPIBB Coordinating Sub Group

    • Other QH administrative areas/processes

      Process:

    • QHSSP will initiate the release of the Evaluation outcomes to HR payroll as well as all HP managers.


    ad