BOH minutes 112496 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

BOARD OF HEALTH 6 NOVEMBER 21, 1996 Alice - How are you going to get the final number? Mathematical average or discuss ??? Tim - Some numbers will have to be put down up front. We did not discuss last time that we would accept at mean or remember last time we had 2.25. Does that equal a two or three? But, simply put the numbers. But by some common consensus whatever that number is. Say it comes out to 2.24. Well, do we as a group say that means 2 or 3? We will have to come to that consensus or we just say that its up front that we go with whatever the number is 3.7 equal 4. We never discussed that at the last meeting and we basically discussed that at last year’s meeting. Dr. Adler thought it should be decided now. Dr. Klein - 10 items on workplan - How scored? The average of all those ten numbers or it is going to be some overall impression. Tim - We said this year at last month’s meeting. That we added an extra category. For terms that Peg Carlson suggested we put in for administrative activities or skills. But that weighted equally. We said for this year they would all basically be a mean. If there were any weighting they were all weighted equally. Tell me if there is anything different from that interpretation. They were weighted equally, so therefore there was a mean. A mean of all of the scores for each particular one and then a mean of all the different categories and that was what the final number would be. It would not be a separate thing like we had last time. It was simply racking the numbers up. Dr. Foster - If we crunch the numbers and we agreed how we are going to round then. Which we have not talked about. We crunch the numbers and we come up with figure. What will you do with the subjective remarks that may come from each of our interviews and perspectives. Are you going to present those also in anonymous form? Tim - that was also brought up - that everybody would be providing those as well. Either in margins or separate sheet of paper and we would tally all those. If point #7 had six commentaries we would just simply list them. To put it in a greater context for the larger picture of what the mean would look like. Dr. Foster - So if we do the numbers and then you also remove the subjective remarks by category . Then when we get into meeting. First of all, the easiest thing would be the numbers are in there. You have a 3.6 or whatever. But, then I would think that we would need to have a dialog about each one of those and the comments. Because I would think that the comments would show consistency, inconsistency and so forth and to me that is the most valuable part of the potential feedback for Dan is those remarks and discussion of those. I think that should be part of the process. Dr. Klein - question on mean - last year some our numbers we able to allowed to change back and forth and that’s when we got confused. Alice - We crunch all the numbers and it could be 1 , 2 ,3 4 ,5. Why don’t you say that you are going to come up with a number. Say that the number is between 3 and 4 then we decide on 3 or 4. but we will not decide on 2 and 5. Let’s say that when we come to the numbers you are going to come up with some kind of number, which will presumably will say between 3 and 4 , so then that’s what you go on, is whether it should be a 3. Dr. Foster - yes and do that following the discussion of the remarks and the perceptions and the after thoughts that somebody learned but forgot to write down or whatever.