OC San's Board-adopted comparator framework and its historic 75th-percentile aggregate target are negotiated policy commitments, not consultant preferences. Our job is to measure position against them precisely, report both the 50th and 75th percentile for every benchmark as the RFP requires, and give the Board a projection model it can steer.
The compensation survey final report carries, for each benchmark: agencies surveyed, comparable class title, range max, match count, 50th and 75th percentile values, position against both, percent above or below the market median, percentile placement for salary and total compensation, methodology, key issues, and costed recommendations. This is our standard workbook layout, not a custom accommodation.
Salary tells you who wins offers; total compensation tells you who keeps people. We collect employer retirement contributions (including CalPERS/OCERS-style classic versus PEPRA distinctions), health contributions, leave value, and special pays, and we show where the two measures disagree, because at 17 fixed comparators the disagreements are exactly where negotiation arguments start.
A Board-adopted list removes comparator-selection fights and speeds collection, and the published Q&A confirms roughly 80 of the ~150 active classifications have served as benchmarks in recent data collection. Match quality carries all the weight: with 17 agencies, one weak match moves a percentile. Our match documentation records the basis for every comparable-class decision so HR can defend any single number a year later without us in the room.
Task 7 asks where specific increase packages would place OC San over time. We deliver that as a working model: enter a scenario, see projected aggregate and by-group percentile position by year. The demonstration below shows the mechanics on illustrative numbers.