Personnel Prioritization Process

In alignment with RAPP's mission and charge, in spring 2023 RAPP agreed to the following process for all personnel prioritization requests. As RAPP evolves to meet the needs of the College, the process will be adapted and updated (version as of June 2023).

Overview of Process

RAPP makes forms available and provides training on how to submit position requests.
Managers/chairs submit position requests to their area dean for review.
Deans submit position requests to area Vice President/Associate Vice President for review.
Area Vice Presidents/Associate VPs provide input/feedback to RAPP on collegewide resources available.
RAPP trains voting members on how to review the position requests and how to apply the criteria.
Positions requests are assigned to groups for review.
At least two different groups review each position request.
Groups develop questions for deans/managers/chairs if additional information is needed.
At least two different groups assign a priority level to each position request.
The groups come together to discuss the priority level assigned to each position, reasons behind the decision, and agree upon the priority level for each position.
Deans/managers/chairs are given an opportunity to respond to questions or provide clarifications.
All positions go back to the full committee for discussion.
The full committee makes a recommendation to College Council.
College Council makes a recommendation to the President.
The President makes a decision on recommendation from College Council.

Timeline

RAPP members developed a planning timeline (adopted spring 2023) for the 2023-24 academic year to guide program review, instructional equipment requests, personnel prioritization and more.

2023-24 Important Dates

RAPP approved the following dates for processes to take place in the 2023-24 academic year.

Process Details

Step 1: Budget Advisory Committee Determine Funding Available

The Budget Advisory Committee informs RAPP of available funds for personnel requests. These funds are within one pot of money to be allocated across faculty and new staff and administrative position requests.

Step 2: RAPP Training Conducted

RAPP team members attend a workshop to be trained on the college’s educational master plan, equity plan re-imagined, personnel forms, review criteria and process. RAPP will host a workshop for managers/deans/chairs on how to complete the form.

Personnel Prioritization and Resource Allocation Training Slides, September 2023

Step 3: Forms Available

RAPP makes forms available:

* Faculty position requests will be submitted within the Program Review tool. To request access to the form as a submitter, please email the Institutional Research and Planning Office at newellmallory@deanza.edu.

Faculty requests can be made for replacements, retirement or growth positions. New classified staff and administrator requests can be made for positions requiring new funding. Retirements, resignations or grant funded positions do not need to be submitted for ranking at this time.

Each request form clearly outlines the guiding principles of the college and asks requestors to align their request to those guiding principles. Areas that are requesting more than one position are asked to rank their positions within their area and provide the ranking to RAPP.

Step 4: Deans and Vice Presidents Review Forms

Managers/chairs/supervisors submit either a faculty request form or a new classified staff/administrator request form to their area dean for review.

The area dean reviews the form for accuracy, completeness and ensures the request aligns with the overall goals of the area. Deans may choose to have their area rank the requests if multiple requests are made and provide the ranking information to RAPP.

Deans submit the forms to their area Vice President/Associat Vice President.

The Vice President/Associate Vice President, in consultation with Senior Staff, conduct a high-level collegewide review of the requested positions and available resources. Senior Staff provides input and/or recommendations to RAPP for consideration.

Step 5: RAPP Reviews Personnel Requests

RAPP reviews all submitted forms through a small group evaluation, small group norming, and a large group discussion which includes the following:

RAPP voting members are divided into groups being mindful of the composition of the group (e.g., administrator, faculty, staff, student) and their employment area.  Group members who are affiliated with the area requesting the position will not be assigned to review the respective position.

Position requests are assigned to small groups of voting members (each position is reviewed by at least two groups) and the following criteria is used to assign a priority level to each position:

A. Required Position

1. Is the position required based on special regulations such as law, Title 5, Education Code, student success initiative or accreditation standards, etc. for the position (review question C1 of faculty form and B3 in staff form). 

Is documentation provided? Yes/No 
Does the documentation indicate the position is required? Yes/No/Unclear

Through the small group discussion and review of information provided, if it is determined that the position is clearly required and documentation is provided to justify the requirement, the position gets added to the pool without further review and is assigned the priority level of “required”.  

If the position is not deemed to be required or documentation is not provided, the group proceeds to the next steps: 

B. Guiding Principles  

2. The position request meets the following guiding principles:  

the form was fully complete, the response was thorough, thoughtful and articulates the need for the position (evaluate entire form) Yes/No 
the position request is clearly aligned to the College’s Educational Master Plan (evaluate question C2 on the faculty form and question A2 on the staff form). Yes/No 
the position requested is clearly aligned to the College’s Equity Plan Re-Imagined (evaluate question C3 on faculty form and question A2-A7 on the staff form). Yes/No

If the small group answered “No” to any of the questions above, the position does not advance.

The group indicates why the position received a “No’ in any category and enters the reason in the priority level template:  

the form was “incomplete”. 
there was "lack of alignment” with the guiding principles of the college (provide a brief summary of why it lacks alignment)

If the small group was able to answer “Yes” to all three questions above the position is “Aligned” to the Guiding Principles.

The small group then engages in dialogue around the following questions: 

C. Alignment with College Goals 

For the following questions, indicate the level of alignment overall with the

3. The program’s goals support the achievement of the College’s mission, Educational Master Plan and Equity Plan Re-Imagined, including: 

The position is aligned to one of the college’s Strategic Initiatives including: Outreach, Retention, Student-Centered Instruction and Services, Civic Capacity for Community and Social Change or Racial Equity (review questions C2-3 in faculty form and question A2 in staff form).  Indicate the level of alignment: Strongly Aligned, Moderately Aligned, Little Alignment
The program clearly uses, or indicates how it will use, data to develop, adapt, and improve teaching and learning, to respond to the needs of changing environments, populations served, and evolving state priorities (review question A5 for instructional faculty, B2 for noninstructional faculty, A2-7 for staff). Indicate the level of alignment: Strongly Aligned, Moderately Aligned, Little Alignment
The position clearly supports on-going college operations and/or student success (review A5 for instructional faculty and B3 for noninstructional faculty in the faculty form and A1-2 and B2 in staff form). Indicate the level of alignment: Strongly Aligned, Moderately Aligned, Little Alignment
The position clearly contributes to the health, growth, or vitality of the program (review C1 in faculty form and B1 in staff form).  Indicate the level of alignment: Strongly Aligned, Moderately Aligned, Little Alignment

Step 6: RAPP Assigns Priority Levels to Each Personnel Request

Based on the dialogue within each small group, responses to any outstanding questions, the small group then determines the priority level of the requested position:  

High (3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)

The group is asked to provide a summary (300 words or less) of their dialogue and why they selected the priority level for the position.

The groups then enter their results in the position tracking sheet. The ranking sheet and 300-word summary of each position will be made public.

Step 7: RAPP Groups Engage in Norming and Reconciliation

The two groups that individually reviewed the same positions come together to discuss their priority levels and establish agreement on all positions. In this way, every position is reviewed twice, and the group must review their decision together and come to a consensus on each position. Theoretically norming their decision.

Step 8: Deans and managers invited to respond to questions and provide feedback

Deans and managers come to a scheduled meeting to respond to questions from the groups and to provide additional context if needed.

Step 9: RAPP Discusses All Positions and Prioritization Lists

After the reconciliation process between the groups, all voting members discuss the priority levels of all positions.

Step 10: Review RAPP Forms Used for Prioritizations

RAPP tri-chairs review the scoring sheets for each group and ensure they are complete. If any scoring sheets are incomplete, group members will be asked to update the forms.

Step 11: RAPP Votes

RAPP voting members vote to approve the slate of positions. All positions and their priority levels from each group are posted online.

Step 12: Recommendations Sent to College Council

Those positions approved by RAPP go to College Council for approval.