North Seattle College All College Meetings Topic: Results of Employee Surveys in February and May 2014 Dates: November 13, 2014, 11:00 a.m., CC1161 December 4, 2014, 2:00 p.m., NSDR Purpose: Compare the results against your own experience Discuss their meaning Identity any actions that should be taken

Two Employee Surveys Employee Climate Survey—February 2014 Employee Spring Survey—May 2014 Survey Total POC Female CL EX FTF PTF Hrly ??? Climate 160 35 22% 98 61% 32 20% 38 24% 6 4% 14 9% Spring 282 82 29% 174 62% 41 15% 48 17% 46 16% 92 33% 44 11

Employee Climate Survey Questions On a 1 to 5 scale, how satisfied are you.... With the spirit of cooperation across campus? That your suggestions are heard and acted upon? That resources are adequate for faculty, staff and administrators? That the college supports your professional development? That the campus environment is hospitable to all? How physically safe do you feel on campus? How safe do you feel in other ways on campus? How much pride do you feel being an employee? ___________________________________________________________ Opportunity for comments after each question Opportunity for general comments as the last question Demographics: gender, race/ethnicity, employee type, years at NSC

Employee Climate Surveys Three-Year Comparisons Frequencies Average Rating (1-5) Change from 2012 2012 2013 2014 Cooperation 178 94 160 3.25 3.61 3.71 11.1% 14.1% Suggestions 173 159 3.17 3.34 3.46 5.3% 9.0% Resources 177 95 2.86 2.87 3.21 0.3% 12.0% Prof Development 93 158 3.16 3.62 3.78 14.7% 19.6% Hospitable 92 3.57 3.85 3.80 7.9% 6.5% Physically Safe 176 154 4.07 4.16 4.20 2.1% 3.1% Other Safe NA 147 3.88 4.01 Pride 4.03 4.13 4.18 2.5% 3.7% Composite Index 3.44 3.68 3.79 6.9% 10.1%

2014 Employee Climate Survey Disaggregated 2014 Results Groups within or below 5% of the overall mean Group All POC Women CL EX FTF PTF Hrly ?? Number 160 35 98 32 38 6 14 Cooperation 3.71 Suggestions 3.46 Resources 3.21 Prof Develop 3.78 Hospitable 3.80 Physically Safe 4.20 Other Safe 4.01 Pride 4.18 Composite 3.79

2014 Employee Climate Survey Written comments by question by rating Blank 1 or 2 3 4 or 5 Total Cooperation 1 14 11 25 51 Suggestions 43 Resources 19 12 6 38 Prof Develop 10 4 15 32 Hospitable 18 41 Physically Safe 2 23 35 Other Safe 28 Pride 22 31 General 33 Totals 13 99 63 134 332 Legend Blank = no rating 1 or 2 = very dissatisfied or dissatisfied 3 = neutral 4 or 5 = satisfied or very satisfied

Employee Spring Survey Questions Professional Development Community-Building Events Diversity Events Number of activities attended? Q1 Q6 Q12 Reasons for not attending (open)? Q2 Q7 Q13 Value of activities (1-5 scale)? Q3 Q8 Q14 Characteristics of best ones (open)? Q4 Q9 Q15 Suggestions for future activities (open)? Q5 Q10 Q16 __________________________________________________________ Q11. Besides those listed, have you attend other diversity events? Q17. Have you experienced discrimination on campus? (13 choices + “other”) Q18. Opportunity to elaborate on discrimination experience(s). Q19. Opportunity for general comments as the last question ___________________________________________________________ Q20-22. Demographics: gender, race/ethnicity, employee type

Employee Spring Survey Disaggregated 2014 Results Groups not within five percentage points of the overall mean Group All POC Women CL EX FTF PTF Hrly ?? Number in sample 282 82 174 41 48 46 92 44 11 Q1: PD events = NONE 21% 22% 19% 10% 4% 9% 25% 50% 45% Q3: Value of PD events 4.18 4.26 4.23 3.97 4.31 4.19 4.29 4.00 Q6: CB events = NONE 26% 27% 2% 49% 39% Q8: Value of CB events 3.82 3.89 3.86 4.03 3.78 3.83 3.60 2.90 Q12: Diversity events = NONE 35%* 34% 36% 17% 28% 42% 43% Q14: Value of diversity events 3.98 4.07 3.73 4.17 4.09 3.70 3.96 3.44 * The “none” response was accidentally omitted from the choices. This figure includes all “blank” responses.

Employee Spring Survey Q17: Experience(s) of Discrimination (mark all that apply) 76 of 282 (25%) of employees reported 154 types of discrimination Group All POC Women CL EX FTF PTF Hrly ?? Number in sample 282 82 174 41 48 46 92 44 11 # reporting discrimination 76 25% 30 37% 28% 16 39% 14 29% 12 26% 18 20% 9 7 64% Age 29 21 6 5 2 3 Citizenship status Color 15 8 4 Disability Gender expression Marital status National origin Political affiliation Race/ethnicity 22 17 1 Religion Sex 19

Employee Spring Questions Number of Written Comments by Topic/Question Q18. Opportunity to elaborate on discrimination experience(s): N=29 Q19. Opportunity for general comments as the last question: N=29 Total number of comments: 1,113 Questions Professional Development Community-Building Events Diversity Events Reasons for not attending (open)? Q2: N=64 Q7: N=76 Q13: N=83 Characteristics of best ones (open)? Q4: N=191 Q9: N=153 Q15: N=95 Suggestions for future activities (open)? Q5: N=176 Q10: n=115 Q16: N=90

2014 Employee Surveys Themes from written comments 331 from Climate Survey; 1,113 from Spring Survey Many positive comments about students, colleagues, the work we do, our impact on students’ lives, the beauty of the campus, etc. At the same time, the comments suggest ways for us to improve—ways to be more inclusive, to increase collaboration, to create more supportive structures and relationships. That is what the following slides focus on.

Collaboration Decisions are not always transparent nor reflective of input of faculty & staff. We tend to work in siloes isolated from and unaware of one another’s work “Us” vs. “them” is felt in different ways Faculty vs. staff Instruction Building vs. College Center Full-time vs. part-time faculty

Part-time Faculty Often feel marginalized Because time and scheduling constrains prevent their participation in professional development or community-building events Because they encounter some co-workers whose attitudes convey a “second class citizen” message Because they may not know where to find information about campus services, procedures, etc.

Psychological/Social Safety Employees report instances of discrimination or intolerance on various characteristics. This is not always overt, but may be in the form of “monthly micro-aggressions or invisibility.” It is not always safe to disagree with dominant voices or to show a lack of knowledge or a level of naiveté about issues.

Physical Safety For the most part, the campus feels safe. Still ... More external lighting is needed. Campus signage would facilitate way-finding. Emergency preparedness equipment (intercom speakers, emergency call boxes) does not always function properly. Greater visibility of campus security personnel, especially at night, would contribute to a greater sense of safety.

Diversity Time and scheduling prevent many from attending diversity events. The conversation about racial/ethnic diversity has left some feeling defensive, some excluded, some resistant, some discouraged, some hopeful. Some question the value of “diversity for diversity’s sake” and ask, “diversity in the service of what?”

Professional Development LDI is a excellent opportunity, one that hopefully will continue to be available to additional participants. Time and scheduling conflicts are common obstacles to participation, especially for part-time faculty. Classified staff report similar constraints, along with inadequate professional development funds. “Networking with colleagues” and “working with others on common problems” are some reasons that professional development is valued. “Practical” and “relevant” were frequently used to describe the type of professional development that people want.

Community-Building Some did not know about or feel invited to community-building events. This was mentioned by hourly, work-study, volunteer, and part-time faculty employees. Some are not drawn to community-building because they want a purpose beyond socializing. Others value such events for the opportunity to mix informally with people from across campus.

Discussion Questions Do these results ring true based on your personal experience? What do these results mean for our community? What actions, if any, are suggested by these results?

At Your Tables Use the discussion questions to address one or more of the topics. Record the key points of your conversation. Turn in your notes before you leave, to include the name of the note taker for follow-up if needed.

Next Steps This presentation/discussion will be repeated on Thursday, December 4, 2:00-3:00, NSDR. Notes from both discussion notes will be compiled and published to the campus. Priority initiatives will be identified by Executive Team in collaboration with other groups as suggested/appropriate.

Thank You For coming and for participating For encouraging your co-workers to participate as well For your continued interest in and commitment to this work