1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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%

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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
___________________________________________________________
Q Demographics: gender, race/ethnicity, employee type

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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.

12. 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

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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?”

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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?

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. 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