Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.
Compare with Current
View Page History
Version 1
Next »
Attendees:
Marielle G Vizcarra
Mary Wong
Adrianne Calibuso (Deactivated)
Jasmine Montilla
Kelli
Alma Mendoza
Agenda:
- EDI Goals/Prof Dev for PAs
- EDI JD Description
- Fnann's resources /
- EDI Closing Sessions
Topics | 5/11 Notes/Decisions | 05/06 Notes/Decisions | 4/29 Notes/Decisions |
---|
Subcommittee Impacts: |
| Subcommittee 1: - no traction
- reminded the team that we were waiting on traction for subcommittees until we know that is what IPPS needs.
Decision: hold off on these until after June check-in / follow-up with Angela |
|
Surveys |
| Defining Data: - Request some guidance for interpreting the data for Angela
- we need to decipher the definitions of "effectiveness" and "success"
- Edwina mentioned we will have more success with accomplishing goals if the data is coming from "Staff at Work" (SAW) survey
- Our survey are all about EDI vs SAW only has 7 EDI related questions
- need more EDI temperature
- need more demographics
- Goal: we want to bring IPPS in and see what is important to them, we can't get that data from SAW
- Timeline:
- Send email to Angela by Monday May 9th.
- Follow-up in early June on action items
- Finalize decision of Survey or Interviews to get voice of dept. by end of August
| IPPSTERS LEADERS - At this time we won't be moving forward with this survey due to small survey pool and risk of not allowing for anonymity
- Can use questions as an activity during Leadership Forum
- Active discussions and anonymous polls during Zoom
|
Gathering Data | EDI Closing Session
Aligning with Strategy 1-3 Trust
- 1:1 input on experience during IPPS >
- voluntary and additional data from "official interviews"
- Expectations:
- not an exit interview
- acknowledging concerns
- seeking recommendations / solutions for the benefit of IPPS
- Using as a test subject to see if this is viable option
- Official Closing Session on 05/27
- Include Students for these sessions
- ~10 students graduating = good source of data
- students interact daily with leadership
- Questions will be reworked for this demographic
- Virtual option available
- Schedule before June
- Include Temp Employees?
Confidentiality - leadership should NOT ask for names of those participating
- data provided to leadership would be high level topics and overall themes
- examples will NOT be provided
- protect employment opportunities
- Mandated Reporting
- disclose this at the beginning of the session
|
| Staff at Work Survey 166 ppl within IPPS 40 folks are in Leadership
Lacking: - The changes graphics are misleading
- Blue area is VC office and not IPPS (which is what matters to us)
- Department Effectiveness > is this ranked / weighted towards the employee or the supervisor's success?
- looking at the plot where supervisors rank high and the dept employees low > how does this make sense??
- Survey is too long and may not allow for thoughtful responses
- folks do it for incentive, not really for true feedback
- Is not formatted to provide detailed feedback
Need: - direct answers
- gave questions, but did not give actual answer score
- True temperature of employee moral/ needs
- separate from "success" and view what needs work
- need more data on staff demographics
- leadership
- team members
- satisfaction based on demographics
- how is that linked to "success"
|
Side Projects | EDI Goals / PA Questions: all employees Decisions: #1 > only requirement #2 > remove the awards/ luncheons from the options #3 > clarify if (4x) is once per quarter? 4 times per quarter? #4 > include other examples such as Black Staff Association (BSA), Chicanx/Latinx Staff Association (CLSA), see Staff Affiliate Groups (ucsd.edu) for more
Are these goals "check box"? YES, but let's be accountable for moving past the bare minimum. | |
|
ACTION ITEMS | | | - EDI Committee: Review survey questions and consolidate info
- EDI Committee: Review Staff at Work survey to see what we are missing and what we want to know
|
Add Comment