Signed Contracts_Carlson Dettman Consulting Proposal for Classification and Compensation StudyCity of Dubuque
City Council Meeting
Consent Items # 09.
Copyrighted
June 20, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Signed Contract(s)
SUMMARY: Proposal for Classification and Compensation Study with Carlson
Dettmann Consulting; Proposal for the Police/Fire Classification and
Compensation Study and Benefit/Total Rewards Survey with Carlson
Dettmann Consulting; Professional Services Agreement with Carlson
Dettmann Consulting for an assessment of the city's classification and
compensation program; Professional Services Agreement with Carlson
Dettmann Consulting for market measurement for Fire and Police
positions and Benefits/Total Rewards Survey; Vendor Service
Agreement with Carlson Dettmann Consulting for Classification and
Compensation Study; Vendor Service Agreement with Carlson Dettmann
Consulting for Police/Fire Classification and Compensation Study and
Benefit/Total Rewards Survey.
SUGGESTED Suggested Disposition: Receive and File
DISPOSITION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Proposal for Classification and Compensation Study Supporting Documentation
Proposal for the Police/Fire Classification and
Compensation Study
Professional Services Agreement
Professional Services Agreement - Fire and Police
Vendor Service Agreement
Vendor Service Agreement - Police/Fire
Supporting Documentation
Supporting Documentation
Supporting Documentation
Supporting Documentation
Supporting Documentation
CA4SON
DETTMANN
A Cottingham & Butler Company
PROPOSAL
City of Dubuque, IA
Proposal for:
Classification and Compensation Study
June 1, 2023
0 1 P a g e
Table of Contents
A. Contact Information..........................................2
B. Experience and Qualifications ..............................3
C. Approach/Methods Used to Perform the Project .......6
D. Cost Proposal.................................................11
11Page
A. Contact Information
Carlson Dettmann Consulting, a division of Cottingham and Butler Insurance Services,
respectfully submits this proposal to perform a Classification, Wage, and Compensation
Study for the City of Dubuque, IA. The following table contains key information about our
company, as well as the contact information for the Project Director for this project.
Company Name:
Cottingham & Butler Insurance Services, Inc.
Division Name:
Carlson Dettmann Consulting
Cottingham & Butler Insurance Services
Corporate Address:
800 Main Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
Andrew Butler, Executive Chairperson
Officers of the Firm:
David O. Becker, CEO
John E. Butler, Chairperson
Matt Shefchik
Procurement/Contract
Assistant Vice President
Contact:
matt.shefchik@carlsondettmann.com
608.467.0696
Heather Murray
Project Director
Senior Consultant
heather.murray@carlsondettmann.com
715.492.5162
Carlson Dettmann Consulting
Consultant Address:
c/o Cottingham & Butler
2323 Crossroads Drive, Suite 220
Madison, WI 53718
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal, and we hope to have the opportunity
to serve City of Dubuque. Please contact Matt Shefchik with any questions or concerns you
may have regarding this proposal.
2 1 P
B. Experience and Qualifications
Background Ft History
Cottingham & Butler, founded in 1887 and headquartered in Dubuque, Iowa, is the 5th
largest privately held broker in the U.S., and the 25th largest insurance broker in the U.S. and
a recognized leader in offering innovative property & casualty and employee benefit
insurance solutions. In addition to the insurance consulting and brokerage services, the
company provides services relating to claims administration, safety and loss control, wellness
and disease management, and human resources compliance and consulting. The
company employs over 1,000 employees across the U.S. In addition to our Dubuque
headquarters, and other satellite offices, C&B has offices in Madison and Appleton to better
serve our Wisconsin clients.
Carlson Dettmann Consulting (CDC), a division of Cottingham & Butler Insurance Services,
offers human resources consulting services related to: employee compensation and total
rewards; performance evaluation development and training; employee engagement and
strengths -based leadership; labor and employee relations; human resources audits; and
other related human resources consulting services. The following is a brief description of the
journey CDC has taken:
• 1996: The partnership between Charlie Carlson & Scott Dettmann, Principal Consultants
at Carlson Dettmann Consulting, began when they created enetrix (Survey Research
Associates) with a group of partners. Enetrix pioneered internet-based salary surveys in
addition to providing compensation consulting.
• 2008: Enetrix was acquired by Gallup Corporation, and during their time with Gallup,
Charlie Carlson and Scott Dettmann continued their compensation and survey
consulting, in addition to growing their consulting skills in the areas of employee
engagement, performance management, leadership development, and strengths -
based leadership.
• 2010: Carlson Dettmann Consulting was created when Charlie and Scott reacquired
their consulting practice and served public, private, utility, and not -for -profit clients across
the nation. While compensation work has been the backbone of the business, CDC has
a successful employee engagement and performance management business as well.
• 2018: Carlson Dettmann Consulting entered into an acquisition with Cottingham & Butler.
The acquisition provides clients a total -rewards approach where compensation
consulting is balanced with benefits management.
• Current: Carlson Dettmann Consulting's (CDC) field consultants possess decades of
management, human resources, labor relations and compensation experience. CDC's
team has extensive experience working in local government human resources, giving
3 1 P .ge
them the unique ability to truly understand the nature of the industry, setting them apart
from other consulting firms without hands-on public sector experience.
4 1 P a g e
Staff Experience and Qualifications
While we may seek periodic assistance from other team members, the City's interactions
with our team will likely be limited to the following individuals:
Heather Murray, Senior Consultant, would be the project director and project manager, and
work with the City to review classifications, and conduct staff interviews. Heather holds a BA
and SHRM-SCP certification. Heather has over 20 years of professional human resources
experience in the public and private sectors. Her experience includes Human Resources
leadership roles in: local government, financial services, and retail. Heather is a former
county Human Resources Director, past President of the Chippewa Valley Chapter of the
Society for Human Resource Management and past President of the Wisconsin Public
Employers Labor Relations Association.
[Linkedln Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/heathermurray7/]
Ashley McCluskey, Compensation Analyst, would provide assistance on the market data
collection and analysis phases of the project. Ashley holds a BS in Human Development and
Family Studies, and a minor in Human Resources. Ashley has over 10 years of professional
human resources experience in public and private sectors. Ashley has an ever-growing base
of experience relating to payroll, compensation, benefits, and business analysis.
[Linkedln Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashley-mccluskey-086073108/].
Alyssa Woltring, Compensation Analyst, would provide assistance on the job evaluation and
market analysis phases of the project. Alyssa has over 9 years of HR experience, primarily
within the public sector. Alyssa holds a Bachelor of Business Administration in Human
Resources Management from UW-Whitewater and has been with the Carlson Dettmann
team since 2019.
[Linkedln Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aIVssa-woltring-1309b5138/].
5
C. Approach/Methods Used to Perform the Project
Philosouhv of Compensation Consultin
The City states this study will cover approximately 246 job classifications of which we believe
a substantial portion would have reliable market matches (i.e. benchmark jobs).
Our team's approach to compensation consulting strives to find the balance between the
external market pressures facing today's employers and the need to design a pay structure
that is internally fair and equitable.
Although the City is responsible for making the key decisions, we view ourselves as a strategic
business partner entrusted with collecting and analyzing vital competitive data, and taking
that data and turning it into a comprehensive and understandable set of recommendations.
Comuensation Proiect Definition and Orientation
The first step in this project would be refinement of the project plan to meet the specific
needs of the parties. An initial meeting with the appropriate administrative team, as well as
the key decision -makers, will help ensure mutual understanding concerning the scope and
task sequence of the study and each party's role. Specific items to be addressed would
include:
• An agreed upon, detailed timetable for the project — overall and interim steps. CDC
has provided a generalized timetable for the City's consideration and follow-up
discussion, which would be formalized along with a more detailed project scope.
• The system and process our firm utilizes to determine the relative value of each position
using CDC's Point Factor Job Evaluation System.
• A discussion on the role that individual (or group) performance currently plays within
the organization, and the desired role the City intends performance to play in future
decisions.
• The policy and intentions of the parties with respect to correcting inequities that may
be identified;
• The manner of communicating project progress to City leaders and staff.
At the outset of the study, and throughout the process, we would ask the City's decision -
makers to provide guidance on four key policy areas:
We would lead a discussion on potential answers to these questions, offer our experience
and suggestions, and develop the pros and cons of the various alternatives.
6 1 P a g e
The project can be broken down into four distinct phases, which may overlap over the
course of the project:
• Kickoff/Strategy Phase: We start by reviewing organizational concerns,
establishing/framing expectations of each party, and receiving preliminary
guidance/instructions. These conversations and/or meetings typically occur over the first
few weeks, and often overlap with the following phase.
• Information/Data Collection Phase: The job documentation and market data collection
phase comprises the lengthiest phase of the project, and can be expected to take
upwards of 12 to 15 weeks to fully complete. This timeframe includes the mid -project
interviews with department leaders (and key management staff) to verify the
documentation.
• Planning & Development Phase: Once we have had the opportunity to clarify our
questions, and fine-tune our initial findings, we begin developing options for
consideration by the client (including the development of costing estimates). Depending
on the viability of the initial recommendations, this process typically takes between 4 and
6 weeks.
• Adoption Phase: The adoption phase varies client -by -client, largely due to each entity's
unique processes and politics related to adoption. Once we're prepared to deliver the
results, the decision -makers and/or governing body often dictate the timing of the final
decision.
Methodology: Benchmarking Ft Establishing Salaries
Information/Data Required - Wage Analysis
CDC would require certain information from the City to complete the wage analysis portion
of the project. The data fields required for the wage analysis include the following individual
data for the employees subject to the study:
• First Name, Last Name, Job Title, Department, Current Rate of Pay, Current FLSA Status, FTE,
Annual Work Year, Gender, Current Grade, Current Minimum, Current Market Rate / Midpoint,
Current Maximum, Hire Date, Job Date, Birth Date, and annual wage data for the prior fiscal
year in cases of required compression analysis.
Our primary concern with this section is that the data be in our requested format so that we
may minimize the need to engage in additional conversations to "clean" the data for our
use. We further request that the job title provided for this section is consistent with the job title
provided in the job documentation (described below) so that we are easily able to ascertain
which job is assigned to which file. We request that the wage analysis data and the job
documentation data be provided electronically.
Market Data Collection / Selection of Comparable Employers
7 1 P a g e
CDC would collect and analyze relevant labor market information for the City to determine
competitiveness of base salaries. We would utilize this custom survey data, as well as
excellent published private -sector data to augment the custom public -sector survey. CDC
maintains an extensive library of current, valid, and reputable surveys for this purpose. We
have invested in the tools and resources necessary for us to continue to improve our
efficiency, as well as the reliability of the final results. The investment required to provide our
clients with meaningful wage information is significant, but we understand and appreciate
that not all data sources are created equally (e.g. "crowd -sourced" data vs trusted survey
vendors).
As it specifically relates to the selection of comparable public sector employers for this
compensation engagement, we typically request data from between ten to twenty
comparable organizations for each unique project, and we employ survey practices that
ensure a high rate of data collection. The list of comparable public sector employers is
provided to the City for review and approval prior to data collection beginning. The reasons
for the large sample size are varied, but include the following:
• It guarantees that no single organization will
influence the final results. This is equally true for
high and low -paying organizations. Our final
result is a representation of the true marketplace.
• Not every entity in the selected comparable pool
has a similar position within their organization. A
larger grouping provides a greater possibility that
we'll have sufficient matches.
• In line with best practices for a compensation
study, our goal is to achieve market matches (i.e.
benchmark jobs) for between 40% and 70% of
the jobs covered by the study, and over 50% of
the employees covered by the benchmark jobs.
A comprehensive pool of comparable
employers increases the likelihood of meeting this
target.
We would engage the City in a dialogue, and provide
professional guidance, to arrive at a list of organizations
for the custom survey consistent with the City's
demographic characteristics. Our recommendations
Comparisons To The
Private Sector
In today's labor market, it is
impossible to ignore
comparable jobs in the
private sector markets in
which our clients compete.
Our firm maintains an up-to-
date and robust library of
third -party surveys, which
allows for aligning our
recommended structures
with both the private and
public sectors.
While not every public sector
job has an analogue to the
private sector (e.g. Chief of
Police), the are ample
rnmr)nricnnc to ha mnr-la
would be based on an exploration of information related to, but not limited to, the following:
proximity, tax -base, population, hiring practices, commuting patterns, etc.
8 1 P a g e
Ultimately, the choice of comparisons will be the City's responsibility; our role is to
advise. However, we will lead the City through a discussion of potential answers to these
questions, accompanied by recommendations, to help the City make its policy choices.
Job Documentation
Position analysis is the formal process we use to gather and assess information about the
duties, responsibilities and requirements of each position. In order to evaluate job content
objectively and classify jobs, we need accurate documentation with position responsibilities.
This is the first part of the job evaluation portion of the project.
CDC can conduct position analysis using either of two methods. One method involves
review of up-to-date job descriptions provided by the client. Assuming the City's job
documentation has been updated within the last twelve (12) months, we are comfortable
utilizing existing documentation.
The alternative method requires completing our Job Description Questionnaire (JDQ). This
can be used for all jobs in the study —which many clients choose —or for select jobs where
the duties require better definition.
If the City determines the quality of existing job documentation is not sufficient for accurate
evaluation, then the best way to obtain accurate information for projects such as this is to
have employees describe their own jobs in a systematic, complete manner using the CDC
JDQ form. The sections of the JDQ correspond to the CDC Job Evaluation System factors to
support system content reliability and validity. Because the person performing the job is the
single best source of information about the job, the City's employees become critical
participants in this project.
After we have had an opportunity to review the job documentation, we would interview the
City's leadership team and department heads to better understand job responsibilities, the
dynamics of each department, and any observations regarding compensation issues that
department heads may wish to share.
Once we have completed a full review of the job documentation, the City can use the
JDQ's to make appropriate job description revisions, if desired. (We can provide a copy of
the CDC JDQ form upon request.)
Job Evaluation
The purpose of job evaluation is to provide an objective means of ranking each position in
an organization, independent of individual performance, into a hierarchy. In other
circumstances, we could conduct this portion of the project either by conducting the
evaluations independently as your consultant, or by using an employer -appointed job
evaluation committee.
9 1 P a g e
Our job evaluation methodology is based upon determination of clear or discernible
differences in job content. Our system measures job content at objective levels in the
following dimensions (otherwise known as "compensable factors"):
_ Context and Required
_"IF Complexity Response
ProblSolving
Decision -Making Impact of Extent of
PIP • • Judgments Actions Taken
Interactions Context of Outcomes
Interactions and Effects
OF V s 'A in
Work Potential for Physical
Environment Accidents or Requirements
Hazards
Formal Formal Experience
Preparation Education Required to
Experience Required Qualify
Level of
Decision -
Making
Each of these factors is broken down into sub -factors with point levels associated with
measured levels on each factor. We have used the system in thousands of applications,
and it consistently yields valid results. These factors of internal job worth have proven to be
consistent with values found in our client organizations. Because of the breadth of all of our
factors, they cover all main aspects of a job and are seen as relevant to employees at all
levels in the organization.
Pay Plan Design
Using the results of the job evaluation process (internal relationships), market data (external
competitiveness), the City's current pay practices, current performance evaluation system,
strategic objectives, and other pay challenges (e.g. compression, highly competitive jobs,
etc.), CDC would design an appropriate salary structure and provide to the City the policy
recommendations necessary to develop the supporting policies.
We would provide pay plan implementation alternatives to fit the City's financial capacity.
If there are positions deemed to be overpaid, then some version of "red -circling" would be
the suggested method of moving forward with those situations. Additionally, not all
recommendations may be able to be implemented in one budget year, and a longer-erm
plan may be necessary for achieving the desired pay competitiveness.
101Page
Adoption/Presentation
We are proud of our record of adoption and system continuation. We develop and present
solutions that are sound, understood, and stand the test of time. We believe this is largely
because we actively engage our clients in the decision -making process.
We advocate transparency in our consultations, so the City can expect an articulate,
detailed discussion of our findings and recommendations. We not only encourage our
clients to emphasize communication with employees at all steps of the process, but we
would anticipate distinct conversations/presentations with the City leadership (e.g.
leadership, committee, board, etc.) as it relates to market selection and placement, mid -
project findings and update, review of policy questions, and a final report and
presentation(s).
PrODosed Timeline
The following is a tentative timeline that spans from initiation of the project to final adoption.
It is our best approximation of the steps and time needed to complete the project, but may
require revision once the project is refined in our conversations with the City. For example, if
the City is comfortable with the current state of its job documentation, we could accelerate
the project slightly since we would not be waiting for this to be completed by the employees.
Task Anticipated Completion
Project Orientations / Initial (Virtual) Meetings ...................................
Employer Data Collection...................................................................
Market Data Collection.......................................................................
Collection of Job Documentation......................................................
Job Evaluation /Job Analysis...............................................................
Market Data Analysis...........................................................................
Department/Management Interviews ..............................................
Performance Standard Development and Leadership Discussions
Develop Initial Findings & Recommendations ..................................
Review Initial Results with City.............................................................
Mid -Project Update / Policy Guidance ............................................
DraftReport..........................................................................................
Review Adoption Strategy with City ..................................................
Presentation of Final Report................................................................
AppealsProcess.....................................................................................
D. Cost Proposal
.................................Week 1
...............Week 2 to Week 4
.............Week 2 to Week 10
...............Week 2 to Week 8
.............Week 8 to Week 12
...........Week 10 to Week 14
...........Week 12 to Week 13
...........Week 12 to Week 16
...........Week 13 to Week 15
...........Week 15 to Week 16
...........Week 16 to Week 17
...........Week 17 to Week 19
...........Week 20 to Week 22
...............................Week 22
.............Following Adoption
Because compensation consulting is our team's primary line of work, we build our proposals
on the scope of work and not necessarily on the specific hours it takes to complete each
component (or phase of each project). This enables us to offer a firm fixed fee proposal that
meets the interests of both our clients and our firm. This further solidifies our independent
111 Page
contractor status, with our team's (and company's) exposure being the opportunity for profit
and/or loss. If the job takes longer and/or costs more than originally anticipated, we bear
the burden of this miscalculation, unless project requests are deemed outside the scope of
services.
The total professional fees for the classification and compensation study are indicated
below:
Classification & Compensation System Design (246 job classifications
@ $450/each) *includes $2,500 discount from High-level Market
Review and $6,000 from Fire/Police Market Review
$102,200
Travel Expenses, includes up to four (4) trips:
• An onsite meeting with the appropriate parties (e.g.
leadership, board, committee, etc.) to determine goals,
challenges, and to initiate the project,
*Incurred travel
• An onsite meeting with the appropriate parties (e.g.
leadership, board, committee, etc.) to review tentative
expenses
beyond these
findings and recommendations;
four (4) trips
• Presentation to the appropriate decision -making body for
action; and
• Additional reserved meeting, to be determined at a later
date dependent on circumstances.
Includes the first five (5) classification appeals, additional appeals @
a * 225/
$ ppeal
$225/each
* We would only charge actual, incurred travel expenses, and would work to mitigate the number of
appeals as well.
There may be opportunities to maximize the trips by serving multiple purposes on a single trip
(e.g. management planning meeting, department director orientation, board overview,
etc.).
We also would conduct management (i.e. department head) interviews remotely/virtually
to ensure internal ratings are accurate and concerns are addressed. It is anticipated that
these interviews would span at least two full days. Further, periodic status conferences
and/or ad hoc meetings are anticipated and would be conducted via phone conferences
or web -based technology (e.g. Zoom).
Our proposal is based upon an estimate of 246 job classifications which is an approximation
based on the size of the City. Our experience has been that this count may eventually
change during the course of a project. Accordingly, we propose adjusting the fee
appropriately with the City invoiced $450 for every job evaluation over the 246-job
evaluation count.
12
Additional Work / Hourly Rates: [OPTIONAL
Any additional work outside the scope of the project may be requested and agreed upon
and would be invoiced at either our standard hourly rates of $250, or for an additional
project fee as mutually agreed upon by the City and CDC. It is our experience that it is more
economical for a client to negotiate scope and price with our team than it would be to
simply engage our services at an hourly rate. We believe we would have the capability to
assist the City in many areas, but also understand that any additional work depends on the
relationship we've built with the City in the course of the classification and compensation
study.
Job Evaluation Training: [OPTIONALI
If the City chooses to administer the classification review of its own jobs post -project (a
service numerous clients request us to administer on their behalf), we would have the
following requirements:
• that such a decision be made prior to the evaluation of the jobs;
• a team of City personnel participate in the initial evaluation of all jobs;
• a commitment of 3 to 5 full -days of the team's time to be trained and to evaluate the
jobs; and
• a signed nondisclosure agreement.
The fee for this training would be $7,500.
Classification Appeals: [OPTIONALI
Many of our projects include an appeals/review process following adoption of a new plan.
Because the approach to appeals varies from client -to -client, we have found it easiest to
include this as an optional add -on to a project. If the City desires to incorporate an appeals
process, the City will be invoiced $225 per appeal/review submitted for our review and
recommendation. Appeals must be completed within 90 days of plan adoption. Thereafter,
the City would need to submit a request for classification review.
Job Descriptions: [OPTIONALI
We are willing to assist the City in re -writing their job descriptions, but we also believe this to
be an optional service. Further, although employees will likely be completing JDQ's as part
of this process, there is a marked difference between having sufficient information to
evaluate a job for content and preparing said information for a more formal job description.
The details required to provide a meaningful job description require greater review,
arrangement and rewording of the information provided, and more back -and -forth with
supervisors and managers to arrive at the final documents for each classification. The City
would be invoiced $500 per job description.
Review of FLSA Exemption Status: [OPTIONALI
131Page
The City may request verification of an evaluation of positions for proper FLSA exemption
placement as part of the project. Conducting a detailed review of exemption status would
add a great deal of time to the existing project. The City may choose to complete this portion
of the project after implementation of the Classification and Compensation plan adoption.
We provide this as an optional service that would be agreed upon and would be invoiced
at $150 per position. If this option is selected, the project scope and classifications for review
would be mutually agreed upon.
Alternatively, throughout the project we may provide a high-level review and identify
potential classifications that the City should consider reviewing the FLSA exemption
placement of in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act. With this option, CDC would
not provide a written recommendation.
Any recommendation that is made under either of these options should be reviewed by the
City's counsel, or designee.
Post -Project Job Evaluation: [OPTIONALl
Once we enter the ongoing maintenance phase of the project, any classification reviews
conducted for the City could be conducted at our standard client -rate (currently $275 per
classification). Further, if the City requires a competitive market -based estimate (and we
have sufficient data in our systems), the fee would be at our standard client -rate at the time
of the request (currently $300 per classification). In the instance a client desires both a job
evaluation rating (i.e. grade placement) and a market -estimate, our fee would be $425 for
the two (as it currently stands).
14
Payment Schedule:
The project fee would be paid in five (5) equal installments of the agreed upon project fee:
initial payment due upon execution of a professional services agreement, second payment
due at the start of the second month of the project, third payment due at the start of the
third month of the project, fourth payment due at the start of the fourth month of the project,
and the final payment due upon delivery of CDC's findings and recommendations to the
City.
This proposal is valid until June 15, 2023. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal,
and we hope to have the opportunity to serve the City on this project and thereafter.
Respectfully submitted on June 1, 2023.
CITY OF DUBUQUE
Bv:'I�/`�'�
Date: 06/02/2023
CARLSON DETTMANN CONSULTING
By. &-�� -
Matt Shefchik, Assistant Vice
President
Date: 06/02/2023
151Page