This portal was built by House Strategies Group from the RFP record itself: every classification, employee group, and department in Attachment A, and every task in the Scope of Work. It is a working preview of how we run the study rather than a brochure about how we would.
Three connected products, in the order the Scope of Work presents them: classification specifications employees recognize as accurate, a family and series structure with real career pathways, and an implementation-ready record that holds up in meet-and-confer and on the public record.
Position description questionnaires for the classifications in Attachment A, orientation and briefing sessions for employees and bargaining unit representatives, and interviews with employees, supervisors, and managers, conducted virtually as the RFP expressly allows.
Series and level review family by family: comparable classification of comparable work, defensible level distinctions, anomalies corrected, outdated classes retired, and new classes recommended where operations have outgrown the plan. Attachment A already shows where to look.
ADA-conformant, FLSA-designated specifications in the Town's approved format, a Final Report with methodology and an implementation plan, meet-and-confer participation as requested, and employee-communications follow-up as the Town's Q&A anticipates. The Town expects no Council presentations, and none are priced.
Every figure on this portal is computed from the RFP record: the Attachment A classification list, its employee groups and departments, and the Scope of Work's own task structure. The Workforce Analysis page is the level of analysis Los Gatos will receive throughout the study, and it existed before proposals were due.
The Scope of Work states that interviews with employees, supervisors, managers, and department directors can be conducted virtually. Our practice already runs this way, including recorded orientation sessions employees can rewatch before completing their questionnaires, with on-site time reserved for the milestones where presence matters.
The people who present at your orientation sessions are the people who read the PDQs and draft the specifications. Our fee schedule is task-by-task and names who does what, so the adequacy of the commitment can be verified rather than assumed.
Our classification lead has spent a career building and defending classification structures in large, represented public-sector environments that dwarf this study's footprint. An 87-classification town plan gets the same rigor, with the senior team in the room rather than a bench of juniors.
Nothing here uses non-public Town data. Workforce figures come from Attachment A of the RFP. Where a module demonstrates method on illustrative data, such as the Ladder Lab, it is labeled as illustrative. The real study runs on the validated position and incumbent data the Town provides at project initiation. One more honest note: the RFP's detailed task list is classification-focused, and we asked the Town through the OpenGov Q&A process rather than guessing. On August 12 the Town answered: proposals reflect the classification study only, with compensation to follow and hourly rates requested so a later amendment can carry it. Our proposal conforms exactly, with the classification study as the base scope and a pre-priced market compensation module ready when the Town is.