Dunn County proposes new quarterly performance reviews tied to 2026 pay adjustments

Dunn County human resources staff presented a redesigned performance-management process and a proposal to tie 2026 pay adjustments to October performance ratings during the Executive Committee meeting.

The proposal would replace the county’s fixed 11-step system across 25 pay grades with a market adjustment plus performance-related increases: a 2.75% raise for employees rated "meets expectations" and a 3.25% raise for those rated "exceeds expectations." Employees rated "needs improvement" in October would not receive a pay increase for 2026. County staff said the market adjustment portion would be 2.25% with the remaining 0.5% or 1.0% representing performance-related pay.

Why it matters: County staff said the change is intended to give the county flexibility to respond to budget constraints and to provide a means to recognize high performers without requiring an ordinance change each time pay parameters are adjusted. Staff framed the change as an alternative to the existing step/step-plus-COLA structure that frequently locked in a 2.75% step plus a market/COLA adjustment.

Human resources described the new performance process as quarterly check-ins (around January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1) rather than a single annual review. Managers would complete a simple form with one overall rating and a short narrative; managers have 45 days after January 1 to complete the first check-in. The county also plans manager training, a manager check-in guide with behavior indicators tied to county core values (dedication, ethics, betterment, professionalism, collaboration), and calibration expectations for multi-level management teams.

Staff said the county would use the July conversations to ensure employees rated "needs improvement" are given clear guidance and documentation before the October rating. The county plans to review all "needs improvement" ratings for documentation and fairness and to monitor rating distributions across managers and departments.

Committee members pressed on inter-rater reliability, timing, and retention: Supervisor Moraes urged robust manager training and calibration; Supervisor Kinnear and others asked whether the county could pilot the rating system before linking it to pay. Human resources staff said they had already trained most managers and would continue training and data review; they also noted the first year’s performance spread was intentionally modest to limit major swings while managers adapt.

Key numbers and implementation details provided by staff: a quarterly check-in cadence; three outcome ratings (exceeds expectations, meets expectations, needs improvement); proposed 2.75% for meets and 3.25% for exceeds for 2026; a 2.25% baseline market adjustment included in both proposed percentages; lump-sum bonuses for employees already at top step so those employees can also be recognized. Staff said employees at step maximum would receive the market adjustment and a lump-sum to make up the difference toward the 3.25% where applicable.

Staff noted the change reduces projected wage-and-fringe growth relative to status quo. They provided multi-year projections and said the county’s overall wage and fringe costs rose from roughly $36 million in 2020 to about $49.3 million in 2025 and could reach roughly $62 million by 2030 under current trends; the proposed structure provides more flexibility to manage future budgets.

The county plans individual compensation statements after budget adoption, town halls in January–February, and continued manager and employee training on feedback and performance conversations. Committee members were told the board could amend the final percentages when the budget and ordinance language are considered at the board level.

The committee did not take a final vote on the personnel-code revision or the wage figures at this meeting; the proposal was discussed for committee recommendation to the County Board.