Here's something that I don't really get: How will the District spend $3.1 million on Performance Management? I mean, where will the money go? Will it be spent on computers? on salaries? on consultants?
When I think about Performance Management doesn't it just come down to supervisors doing meaningful performance evaluations of their employees? Why does that cost $3.1 million? I know that it shouldn't cost anything and that it should already be happening, but even if it isn't happening now, why does it cost money - and so much money - to make it happen?
I know that a lot of the Performance Management work is misguided and has been misdirected into evaluating schools - an absurd idea - and that this somehow requires the collection and dissemination of data, but why does that cost $3.1 million? Don't we already have that data? How much could it cost to upload it to a database and run a few queries? I've seen the school scorecards (still in their draft state) and there's nothing new on them. There's no way that these can cost anything like $3.1 million. So where is the money going?
If anyone knows, please tell me. From my perspective Performance Management shouldn't cost much at all. The costs are all in making meaningful employee performance evaluations, informing the employees of how their performance will be measured, and training the managers on how to conduct the evaluations. Beyond that, I don't get it.
If the District is going to spend $3.1 million on this then that $3.1 million has to end up in someone's pocket. Who gets it and what do we get for it?