Packet

September 28, 2026 Committee Of Whole - Agenda 09-28-26 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA - FINAL.PDF September 28, 2026 Committee Of The Whole - Compensation Project Update: Preliminary Results And Pay/Market Philosophy Discussion (PDF) WALWORTH COUNTY_PRELIMINARY RESULTS COUNTY BOARD PRESENTATION_9.28.2026.PDF 1. Documents: 2. Documents: Walworth County Board of Supervisors | 100 W. Walworth St., Elkhorn, WI 53121 | P.O. Box 1001 www.co.walworth.wi.us | (262) 741-7943 (o) | (262) 741-4390 (f) WALWORTH COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING NOTICE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON DAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 202 6 AT 5:00 P.M. County Board Room Walworth County Government Center 100 W. WALWORTH STREET ELKHORN, WI Rick Stacey – Chair Sheila Reiff – Vice-Chair A G E N D A Call to Order Roll Call Order of Business • Cottingham Butler Presentation and Discussion on Pay Plan Philosophy Adjournment Susi Pike Walworth County Clerk Posted: September 17, 2026 @ 10:45 a.m NOTICE: THIS MEETING IS PLANNED TO PROVIDE FOR REMOTE OR OFF -SITE ATTENDANCE BY COUNTY BOARD MEMBERS. THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THE MEETING STREAMING LIVE AT: https://walworthcowi.portal.civicclerk.com/event/2662/media PRESENTED BY Compensation Project Update: Preliminary Results and Pay/Market Philosophy Discussion Walworth County, WI September 28, 2026 Total Rewards Consulting, A Division of Cottingham and Butler Jenna Bidwell| Director, Total Rewards Consulting Shanon Swaney | Consultant, Total Rewards Consulting Alyssa Woltring| Analyst, Total Rewards Consulting Topics Compensation System Components and Process Overview Introduction Market Results Review Pay Philosophy Discussion Next Steps 2 Introductions: Project Team Jenna Bidwell Director Alyssa Woltring Project Analyst Shanon Swaney Consultant Your project team all have experience working in local government and their work on the TRC team focuses on public sector, making them uniquely qualified to understand your organization, its positions, challenges, and unique market. 3 MAJOR PROJECT STEPS ✓ Data collection ✓ Kick off communication ✓ Job description questionnaire completion ✓ Job evaluation of job description questionnaires ✓ Job evaluation training of internal staff ✓ Department head meetings ✓ Market pricing of benchmark positions ✓ FLSA Review ✓ Analysis and combination of internal alignment & external competitiveness ✓ Preliminary results presentation to staff • Discussion of pay philosophy & target market placement • Development and review of draft compensation system • Final adjustments, final summary, and final deliverables • Adoption of compensation system • Appeals process 4 Compensation & Classification System Design Process Overview Discovery Rewards Philosophy & Delivery Current Practices Job Documentation Data Request Analysis Job Evaluation Market Benchmarking Strategy Market Target & Pay Strategy Pay Structure Design Impact Analysis Implementation & Administration Final Communications/Rollout Appeal Process 5 Appeals Process The County has elected to include an appeals process after the formal adoption of the compensation system. PURPOSE OF APPEALS Capture material changes Situations where jobs have changed significantly since the study began, or key information was missing or omitted from the job description questionnaire. Ensure equitable placement Provides another opportunity for the position to be reviewed to ensure accurate and equitable internal placement. APPEALS FLOW Employee initiates Department head reviews HR & TRC review TRC provides final recommendation IF DH & HR ARE NOT ALIGNED County Administrator reviews TRC provides final recommendation 6 4 ESSENTIAL POLICY QUESTIONS Define Target Market Determine Market Placement Design Structure (i.e. Plan Type) Develop Implementation Plan 7 Compensation System Development Creating a formal and sustainable system relies on organizations being consistent in their job evaluation methodology (internal) and market competitive (external) C: Formal Sustainable System B: Externally Competitive A: Internally Consistent Job Evaluation Market Review Pay Structure 8 Reminder on Job Evaluation Factors and Grades Job Evaluation and Internal Consistency  Formal System  JE is a formal, systematic process for ordering a set of an employer’s jobs into a hierarchy based on the content and complexity of jobs in the organization  Documentation  Analysis based on written documentation (or other evidence of duties and requirements)  Objective Analysis  Performance, personality, and other subjective factors are not taken into account.  Comparisons  Analysis not only compares dissimilar jobs across the organizations, but also similar jobs which may have “levels” Thinking Challenges & Problem Solving Context and Complexity Required Response Decision-Making (Impact) Impact of Judgments Extent of Actions Taken Level of Decision- Making Interactions & Communications Context of Interactions Outcomes and Effects Work Environment Potential for Accidents or Hazards Physical Requirements Formal Preparation & Experience Formal Preparation (or Education) Required Experience Required to Qualify for Hire 9 Anatomy of Benchmark • Sufficient Set of Benchmark Jobs • Jobs having likely matches in the market • Stable job content • Data from Relevant Sources • Aligns with recruiting strategy/challenges • Local, Regional, Statewide, etc. • Mix of data sources to provide reliable & stable data • Helps provide a framework for creating hierarchy • Representing positions of varying levels and departments within the organization 10 Walworth County Benchmark Positions  Benchmark positions are positions that were market priced and are used for the regression analysis • ACCOUNTANT • ACCOUNTING CLERK • ACCTS PAYABLE COORD • ADMIN ASSISTANT I • ADMIN ASSISTANT II • ADMIN ASSISTANT III • ADMIN ASSISTANT (NSO) • ADMIN CLERK I (CORP) • ADMIN CLERK II (HHS) • ADMIN CLERK II (RECORDS) • ADMIN CLERK III (CDEB) • ADMIN CLERK III (FIN) • ADMIN CLERK III (HRBEN) • ADMINISTRATOR-LHCC • ADRC SPECIALIST • ADV PRC PSYCH NRS PR • AODA SVC CRD/SAC • ASSOC COUNTY ENG CIV • ASST CORP COUNSEL II • ASST DIR OF NURSING • ASST DIR-SPEC EDUC (COMPLIANCE) • ASST DIR-SPEC EDUC (PRINCIPAL) • ASST PRINCIPAL • ASST SUPR-HWY COUNTY OPS • BENEFITS MANAGER • BENEFITS SPECIALIST • BHVR HLTH CLINICIAN • BSN OF & SPRT SV MGR • BUDGET ANALYST • BUSINESS OFFICE SPRV • BUYER • CAPTAIN • CERT NURSING ASST • CHIEF DEP REG OF DEEDS • CHIEF DEPUTY COC • CHILD & FAM CASE MGR • CHILD SUPPORT SPRV • CIRCUIT COURT COMM • CODE ENFORCE OFCR • COMMUNICATIONS MGR • COMMUNICATIONS OFCR • CONSERVATION TECH • COOK • CORRECTIONAL OFCR • CORRECTIONS SERGEANT • COUNTY ENGINEER • CRISIS CASE MANAGER • DEMENTIA CARE SPEC • DEP CO HWY COMM • DEP MEDICAL EXAMINER II • DEPUTY CLERK COURTS • DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK • DEPUTY DIRECTOR-HHS • DEPUTY DIRECTOR-LURM • DEPUTY REG IN PROB • DEPUTY TREASURER • DESKTOP SUPPORT MGR • DIETARY MANAGER • DIRECTOR OF NURSING • DIR-HLTH & HUMAN SVC • DIR-INFO TECH • DIR-LURM/CORP CNSL • DIR-P SVCS/SCH PSYCH (U) • DIR-PUBLIC WORKS • DIR-SPEC EDUCATION • DIS/ELDER BEN SPEC • DRIVER • ECON SUPPORT SPEC • ENV HEALTH SPEC • EPIDEMIOLOGIST • FACILITIES FOREMAN • FINANCE DIRECTOR • FINANCE MANAGER • FINANCIAL SYS ADMIN • FISCAL SUPPORT LD WKR • FLEET FOREMAN • FOOD SERVICE WORKER • GIS ANALYST/PRGMR • GIS SUPERVISOR • GROUNDSKEEPER • HIGHWAY MAINT WORKER • HR DIRECTOR • HR GENERALIST • HR MANAGER • HS MGR-BHVR HLTH SVC • HS MGR-FAM WELL & PR • HS MGR-LONG TERM CARE • HS MGR-PUBLIC HEALTH • HS SPRV-ADRC • HS SPRV-BHVR HLTH • HS SPRV-CPS • HS SPRV-CRISIS INTR • HS SPRV-ECON SPRT LD • HS SPRV-PUBLIC HLTH • INTERPRETER (CDEB) • INTERPRETER (HHS) • IT BUSINESS ANALYST • IT PROJECT MANAGER • IT SPECIALIST I • IT SPECIALIST II • IT SPECIALIST III • JAIL ADMINISTRATOR • JOURNEYMAN ELECTRICIAN/SECURITY SYSTEM TECH • LEGAL ASSISTANT I (DA) • LEGAL ASSISTANT II (CORP) • LICENSED BEAUTICIAN • LIEUTENANT • LITIGATION ASSISTANT • LPN • LURM ASSISTANT • MAINTENANCE TECH II • MAINTENANCE TECH III • MECHANIC I • MECHANIC II • MEDICAL EXAMINER • MGR OF IT OPERATIONS • NETWORK ENGINEER • NURSE MANAGER • NUTRITION SITE WKR (CDEB) • OCC THERAPIST • OFFICE MGR-DA • OFFICE SUPERVISOR (ADMIN) • OPERATIONS MANAGER • PAYROLL SYS COORD • PHY THERAPIST • PROGRAM MGR-MOBILITY • PROPERTY LISTER • PUB HLTH SPECIALIST • PURCHASING MANAGER • RECEPTIONIST/CLERK (CDEB) • RECRUITMENT MARKETING SPEC • RISK MANAGER • RN-PUBLIC HEALTH • SCHOOL COUNSELOR • SCHOOL NURSE • SENIOR ACCOUNTANT • SENIOR BUYER • SENIOR IT ARCHITECT • SENIOR PLANNER • SENIOR PROJECT MGR • SENIOR SAN ENF OFCR • SENIOR ZONING OFCR • SOC SVCS MANAGER • SOCIAL WORKER • SPEECH-LANG PATH • SPEC EDUCATION AIDE • SUPER-COUNTY OPS • SUPPORT SPECIALIST • SYSTEMS ANLST/DVLPR • SYSTEMS ENGINEER • TEACHER • UNDERSHERIFF • VETERANS SVC OFCR • VETERANS SVC SPEC • VICTIM/WITNESS SERVICES PR • WIC COORDINATOR • WIC NUTRITIONIST 11 Defining the Market Market Definition Comparable Market Competitive Market • Who is like us? • Self-Alignment • Data Driven: proximity, budget/size, structure, etc. • Final result is a smaller group of similar size, scope, philosophy • Who is trying to take our talent? • Employee considerations: Commute, org culture, company growth, career opportunities & growth, work hours, etc. • Final result is a more diverse pool of organizations & industries • Undoubtedly will have overlap with comparable market 12 Market Data Sources Data and Surveys Utilized Comparable Market Competitive Market Counties Municipalities School Districts Private Sector Survey Sources 1. Dodge 2. Eau Claire 3. Fond du Lac 4. Jefferson 5. Kenosha 6. La Crosse 7. Outagamie 8. Ozaukee 9. Racine 10. Rock 11. Washington 12. Waukesha 13. Winnebago 14. Boone (IL) 15. McHenry (IL) 16. Winnebago (IL) 1. City of Beloit 2. City of Burlington 3. City of Delavan 4. City of Elkhorn 5. City of Green Bay 6. City of Janesville 7. City of Kenosha 8. City of Lake Geneva 9. City of Mukwonago 10.City of Racine 11. City of West Allis 12. City of Whitewater 13. City of Rockford (IL) 1. District of Beloit 2. District of Burlington 3. District of Delavan 4. District of East Troy 5. District of Elkhorn 6. District of Janesville 7. District of Kenosha 8. District of Lake Geneva 9. District of Mukwonago 10. District of Waukesha 11. District of Whitewater 12. Racine Unified 13. Syble Hopp School (CDEB) 1. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Janesville-Beloit; Milwaukee- Waukesha; Kenosha; Wisconsin 2. Compdata Benchmark Pro: Milwaukee Wisconsin Area; Wisconsin 3. Economic Research Institute: Beloit, WI 4. Mercer: Racine-Mount Pleasant; Kenosha; Janesville-Beloit; Wisconsin 5. Payfactors: Elkhorn, WI 6. Payfactors Peer: Wisconsin; Upper Midwest 13 Education Market Results 14 Current Structures 15*Market data effective 7/1/26 Market Results Education Group Market Index Market Variance Observations SPED Teachers: Current Pay to BA Market 103% 90% - 118% Lagging market on front end of structure until approx. 10 years SPED Teachers: Current Pay to MA Market 97% 92% - 107% At or near market until top of structure approx. 25 years SPED Teachers: Structure to BA 99% 89% - 112% Lagging market on front end until approx. 15 years 16 Market Results Education: Therapists Group Market Index Market Variance Counselors Structure to Market 98% 85% - 109% Occupational Therapist Structure to Market 88% * Physical Therapist Structure to Market 81% * Speech Language Pathologist Structure to Market 81% 73% - 90% 17 Market Results 18 Formal Sustainable System Pay Structure Design = Market vs. Job Evaluation Methodology  Measured the correlation between job evaluation results vs. market analysis for benchmark positions.  Job evaluation results are an excellent predictor (R2) of market value for the organization's positions.  Used the market linear regression analysis, or line-of-best fit results, to set the “midpoint” or “control point” of the recommended pay grades.  Represents the best approximation of the market for a given job in a given pay grade.  Allows placement of non-benchmark jobs into structure R squared value = 97% 19 Market Summary & Findings BENCHMARK COVERAGE 155 Benchmark positions matched 55% of positions covered 75% of employees covered MARKET POSITION 101.3% Current pay of the median market 97.7% Current structure of the median market 20*Market data aged to 7/1/27 RELATED FINDINGS: FLSA and Special Pay Practices FLSA REVIEW TRC completed a comprehensive FLSA review of County positions to verify exemption status (hourly vs. salary classification). While most positions appear appropriately classified, 18 were flagged for further review. 13 of those represent the greatest potential classification risk. SPECIAL PAY & TIME OFF REVIEW Practices were benchmarked against the identified public sector target market. Core areas of review: Time off Call-In & On-Call Pay Pay Differentials & Premiums Reimbursements & Allowances OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONSIDERATION Overall, the County’s specialty pay programs are competitive and closely align with — and in some cases exceed — the market. A few opportunities exist: 1 Time off award milestones (market generally awards in 5-year increments) 2 RN shift differentials 3 Hourly public works on-call pay (if applicable for operations) 4 Bilingual stipend 21 COMPETITIVENESS BY STRUCTURE Grouping Midpoint Index Overall 98% IT Premium Plan 102% Non-premium management plan 99% LHCC Premium Hourly Plan* 98% Non-Premium Hourly 96% Health Care Premium Plan 95% PW Premium Hourly Plan* 95% HHS Prof Hourly EEs 95% SO Premium Plan* 92% 98% Overall midpoint index Structures sit within a few points of market, with no group showing a meaningful premium. Range across groupings: 92% - 102% of market 22 Market Competitiveness of Current Pay by Quartile • Breaking down benchmarks by quartile can help assess if sections of the system are lagging market • Market competitiveness is generally consistent across jobs and levels; no significant disparities by level (3.61%) (1.55%) (0.88%) (2.56%) (20.00%) (17.50%) (15.00%) (12.50%) (10.00%) (7.50%) (5.00%) (2.50%) 0.00% 2.50% 5.00% 7.50% 10.00% 12.50% 15.00% 17.50% 20.00% Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 % Above/Below Market Walworth County: Market Competitiveness by JE Quartiles 304 1254to Job Evaluation Point 23 STRUCTURE DESIGNS Structure Name Min % of Market Max % of Market Non-Premium Hourly 86%-88% 115%-117% HHS Professional Employees 87% 114%-115% PW Premium Hourly 81%-84% 106%-110% LHCC Premium Hourly 86%-88% 113%-117% IT Premium Management 87% 113% Non-Premium Management 87% 113% SO Premium Management 87% 113% WCHC Premium Management 87%-88% 111%-113% • Inconsistent designs within pay plans • Non-exempt have potential for higher market growth than exempt 24 PAY FOR PERFORMANCE SYSTEM • Current PFP utilizes a merit matrix based on performance evaluation scores • Current ratings based on 5 levels: not meeting, needs improvement, average, solid contributor, and high level • Confidence in current levels vs. consolidated 3 level system: needs improvement, meets expectations, exceeds expectations? • Current score distribution is skewed high • Confidence in tool? • Confidence in raters? • Merit ranges are narrower than step ranges – limited ability with narrow range to meaningfully differentiate Structure Name Min % of Market Max % of Market Non-Premium Hourly 86%-88% 115%-117% HHS Professional Employees 87% 114%-115% PW Premium Hourly 81%-84% 106%-110% LHCC Premium Hourly 86%-88% 113%-117% IT Premium Management 87% 113% Non-Premium Management 87% 113% SO Premium Management 87% 113% WCHC Premium Management 87%-88% 111%-113% 25 OBSERVATIONS & POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES 1 Overall County is competitive at the median market OPPORTUNITY Align to be an “employer of choice” by choosing more aggressive target market placement 2 Updated grade order list will validate internal alignment OPPORTUNITY Simplify and re-align pay plans rather than maintaining multiple pay plans / groupings 3 Review of current pay administration philosophy OPTIONS Step plans vs. hybrid vs. open range Streamline PFP process 26 Pay Philosophy Discussion 27 4 ESSENTIAL POLICY QUESTIONS Define Target Market Determine Market Placement Design Structure (i.e. Plan Type) Develop Implementation Plan 28 PAY DELIVERY PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION ITEMS 01 Should different employee groups have distinct structures? 02 Are there groups where the County sees a need to pay a market premium? Answers here help shape the structure design and premium strategy that follow. 29 MARKET PLACEMENT PHILOSOPHY How does the County want to compete in the market? • Current pay is aligned with median market • Recruiting and retention consideration • Options may include: Market Differentiation • Are there certain groups or positions that the County desires to pay a market premium? Sustainability & Total Package Considerations • Adequate funding: need to be able to sustain market placement & employee movement • Benefits spend & offerings Lag (P25) Near Market (P25/P50 Blend) Meet Market (P50) Above Market (P50/P75 Blend) Lead (P75) 30 MARKET PLACEMENT IMPACT Lag Near Market Meet Market Above Market Lead Market 25th Percentile C/P 25th/50th Percentile C/P 50th Percentile C/P 50th/75th Percentile Blend C/P 75th Percentile C/P Approx 10% Reduction from Market Approx 5% Reduction from Market 100% Market Approx 6% Market Premium Approx. 12% Market Premium Example Grade $43.48 $45.98 $48.46 $51.25 $54.08 31 Control Point (C/P): The market-based target pay rate used as the anchor for each pay grade. Based on benchmark market data and the County's target market position, it serves as the foundation for the pay range and reflects the general market value of jobs within the grade. Factors to consider in design From the employee’s perspective “How do I get a raise?” Financial pressures/limitations Policy Direction Organizational goals Readiness and commitment Can we sustain it? 32 PAY DELIVERY PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION ITEMS 01 Do current pay administration practices align with the organization’s philosophy: steps for non- exempt, performance for exempt? 02 How should pay progress over time? 03 What role should performance and tenure play? These answers set how pay moves and what drives it. 33 SAMPLE PAY STRUCTURES 34 THREE BASIC PAY MODELS TENURE (STEPS) PERFORMANCE (OPEN RANGE) HYBRID • Based on the idea of long-term employment • Almost all pay raises are step progression, promotion or across- the-board • Step advancement should still be based on an annual performance review that “meets expectations” • More predictable, compact structure • Rewards for tenure and assumes increasing competency and mastery in role with time • Employees compete for pay, and the best are rewarded • Less predictability • Lower hiring rates with the tradeoff of potentially higher maximum with continued outstanding performance • Can be difficult to move employees past C/P • Can come with additional risk based on how well performance system is administered • Less differentiation based on performance (step based until control point) • Clear path to the control point (i.e. midpoint of range), but no promise beyond that unless performance meets organization’s standards • Can be difficult to move employees past C/P • Can come with additional risk based on how well performance system is administered 35 PAY DELIVERY PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION ITEMS 01 Do current pay administration practices align with the organization’s philosophy: steps for non- exempt, performance for exempt? 02 How should pay progress over time? 03 What role should performance and tenure play? These answers set how pay moves and what drives it. 33 Next Steps 36 NEXT STEPS FINALIZE TARGET MARKET PLACEMENT FINALIZE STRUCTURE(S) FINALIZE GRADE ORDER LIST DETERMINE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 37 Questions 38