Next steps for Chief Health Officer Succession Committee
Member Christensen addressed the difficulty in getting licensure in the state of Nevada. He feels that current licensure is a big plus. The Board evaluates progressive education, applications being filled out correctly, criminal background checks, fingerprints, verifying both professional and post-graduate education, and every working day in that person’s career. If someone with licensure problems is hired, that could create potential problems. The question was raised if waivers exist in licensing for chief positions versus practicing physicians. Licensing in Nevada can take up to nine months.
Member Hardy said that hiring an assistant who may not have full qualifications at present could lead to eventual hiring with full qualifications as chief at a later time. If something were to happen, an interim could be named until the licensing process is complete. Mr. MacEachern said that there is a provision for an administrative license for someone not actually practicing medicine.
Member Jones felt it best not to create an adversarial or competitive situation for a person to come into an interview setting. The board would like to see what someone will bring to the position, but not in an atmosphere of seeking to beat out an internal candidate. Member Crowley said that applicants must stand on their own qualifications. Also, applicants should have already contacted the medical board to learn licensing requirements in Nevada.
Member Christensen said that the applicants need to come to Nevada. This will give them the opportunity to see the area.
Members agreed that applicants #2, #3 and #4 were strong candidates.
Chair Fairchild was impressed with applicant #5 and the knowledge and background the candidate possesses.
Chair Fairchild asked for concurrence that applicants #1 and #6 did not suit the needs of the District at present.
Member Hardy said that overseeing the budget is important, not just the number of people supervised. Applicants have run individual programs, but have not overseen multiple programs.
Member Crowley said that supervisory experience is key; the successful applicant will not supervise the entire agency. The candidate need to be the public face, interact with people well, be able to understand the organization and what the folks that are working for them are doing. The person needs to have the right personality to fulfill the position.
Member Christensen said that the individual will interact with the legislature, regulated industry and citizens, and handling tough public health problems. Leadership will be required to get the community out of certain circumstances.
Mr. MacEachern said that interviews can be scheduled within two to three weeks, which would be early-mid December.
Chair Fairchild suggested interviewing either December 14th or 15th. From those interviews, a recommendation to the Board could occur in January.
Member Jones asked for clarification on current available positions.
Chair Fairchild said that the Chief Health Officer is open once Dr. Kwalick retires in March; the Assistant Health Officer position is currently open. There is a potential for a third open position incumbent upon how these two positions are filled. Mr. MacEachern said that staff would alert candidates what positions are available when scheduling interviews. District Board of Health Page 4 of 4 Chief Health Officer Succession Committee Minutes November 15, 2006 The committee agreed that December 14 and 15 would be convenient days to interview, for a period of sixty to ninety minutes.
Member Christensen asked who should be involved in the interview process.
Chair Fairchild said that she would like to see the division heads as well as Dr. Kwalick involved in the interview process. Those who work directly with the Chief Health Officer should have input in the process.
Mr. MacEachern said that his staff could provide information about the process, including questions, tour of the facility and licensing requirements.
Member Hardy asked for a grid to prioritize and score applicants in relation to requirements, experience and what the committee feels important, while remaining purely objective in the process. Member Hardy verified that the following must occur:
- applicants should contact medical board before coming to interview
- submit letters of recommendation in regard to leadership style from a supervisor
- have a tour of facility by staff
- have interaction with family/spouse
Discussion ensued about involvement of family and spouse in the interview process. Though the applicant’s spouse should be involved, it is incumbent upon the applicant to discuss the situation with his/her spouse. If the applicant cannot speak effectively with his/her family, then he/she probably wouldn’t do a good job for the District. Once we are down to the final two candidates, perhaps significant family members could be invited to the process.
Recommendations to the Board of Health
Chair Fairchild said that the recommendation to the Board of Health on November 16th will be to invite applicants #2, 3, 4 and 5 to interview on December 14th or 15th. More specific details will follow once we learn that applicants are available. Human Resources will develop pertinent questions and a grid to track qualifications. Staff should be involved in the process. Chair Fairchild asked to know as soon as possible when interviews are scheduled. The committee agreed that interviews could occur outside of regular business hours if necessary.
Member Hardy motioned to recommend the above to the general board. The motion was seconded by Member Crowley and passed unanimously.
Applicant packets were asked to be returned to Mr. MacEachern.