UMC has finally caught up in publishing their meeting minutes for board meetings that occurred in December of last year. One of the items from the December 19th special meeting caught our eye:
Firstly, notice that his evaluation is 82.4. However, in November the El Paso Times reported that he had received a 71.4 (you can read the article here). Why the increase of 11 points in his evaluation? Does the change in his ‘incentive compensation’ mean that he got more of a raise than the reported $10,000 (you can read our post about it here)? These meeting minutes read to us like the UMC board quietly gave him his ‘incentive compensation’ in the form of an additional raise and possibly a bonus.
If you recall, the County Commissioners were very upset that Jim received a raise last year and claimed to have added some additional measures to his performance review:
- Avoid another downgrade in UMC’s bond rating: In February of this year Fitch Ratings put a negative watch on UMC, but then removed the watch in June (read the article here). Four days ago, S&P officially downgraded UMC’s bond rating (read the article here), conveniently AFTER Jim Valenti’s evaluation.
- Maintain Join Commission Certification: One can argue that he did maintain it, after receiving a preliminary denial of accreditation in June of this year (read the articlehere). From what we know, this wasn’t just because of employees not following policies, but also due to poor sterilization procedures that lead to UMC having to cancel elective surgeries. Eventually, UMC was able to have the Joint Commission come back and re-evaluate them. However, how long did UMC have this problem? Since Joint Commission inspection is only every few years, this problem could have existed for quite some time and its effects are far reaching.
Why did the evaluation number change? And, did that change his raise as well as provide him with a bonus?