DMFS

• DMFS Update
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
• Training
  • Presentations and Training
• Funding Central
• MFSP Participant Survey
• Research
• C/MFRCs In Focus
  • Submission Guidelines
• Resources for C/MFRCs
  • Children's Deployment Support Program
  • Key Reference Documents
  • Forms
  • MFRC Board Orientation and Training Kit
  • C/MFRC Contact List
  • MFSP Logos
  • Second Language Training
  • Policies and Standards
  • Publications
  • Research
  • Deployment Support Database
  • Family Violence Prevention and Awareness
• Useful Links

Compensation and Benefits Review Executive Summary

Although MFRCs have common mandated service areas, Personnel Systems discovered that the organizational models used to deliver these services bear few or no similarities. Jobs with similar titles have different areas of responsibility and levels of work, which made all efforts to draw straightforward comparisons challenging. For example, a Prevention and Intervention Coordinator in one community may have a different professional background, level of responsibility and pay scale than a Prevention, Support and Intervention Services Coordinator in another community.

This diversity of positions may account for MFRC staff perceptions that there are significantly disparate rates of pay for the “same job” at different MFRCs. The fact that jobs with similar titles often have quite different responsibilities may also contribute to some CF families’ perceptions of inconsistent service delivery across the country.

Further complications stem from the reality that in many MFRCs, jobs are structured around the job occupant rather than specific functions, particularly if the person is a long-service employee. Creating an atmosphere where employees are encouraged to share their unique skill sets beyond one strict area of responsibility is a common occurrence in the not-for-profit world, but this phenomenon also makes it difficult to compare jobs of similar responsibility and skill requirements across MFRCs and other organizations. 

Personnel Systems found that with a few notable exceptions, there is a fair amount of consistency in what MFRCs are paying for the key jobs providing the mandated services of the Military Family Services Program (MFSP). Perceptions of far greater disparities between MFRCs are most likely created by the differing organization structures and diversity of jobs within the MFRC environment. 

The external market comparison found that on the surface, it appears that MFRCs are paying slightly below the market for some positions, while higher for others. Further data collection and analysis is required to ensure each MFRC comparison is precise, reflecting similar organizations within the same local labour market. DMFS will be pursuing this research to provide each MFRC with accurate external market comparisons for MFSP service delivery.

Among the MFRC community there is a great deal of consistency in terms of human resource practice areas and benefit plans. The most notable differences where external benefits exceed MFRCs are in the areas of pension benefits, medical plans, dental plans and vision care. Some of the variances can be explained by the fact that many of the external agencies are larger in size, are national in coverage, or are tied to government plans.

While the results of this groundwork research are useful, additional data collection and analysis is required to ensure that the overall level of funding allows MFRCs to compete effectively with the external market to attract and retain staff, and that the funding is distributed equitably in accordance with MFSP delivery standards and community needs. 

What’s next?
First, DMFS will be conducting a supplementary review to help determine the most effective organizational model for MFSP delivery, focusing on mandated services and taking CF community complexities into account. DMFS will provide each in-country MFRC with access to their own location’s data upon request. Developing this benchmark model will help determine DMFS funding strategies, while still ensuring sufficient flexibility for each MFRC to meet its community’s unique needs.

Second, as a part of the benchmark model DMFS will develop a form of job measurement, such as a simplified job classification system within MFRCs. This will allow MFRCs to determine the value of jobs that may not have external comparators and may allow for the development of standardized salary ranges. Core jobs within these salary ranges could be compared to market and appropriate budgets could be developed based on the ranges, rather than specific jobs. 

MFRCs who have planned their own compensation reviews should still conduct the reviews according to their directives. It is intended that the development of the benchmark model will significantly reduce the scope of MFRCs’ reviews in the future.   

DMFS remains committed to developing a benchmark model that will not only assess the accurate costs of delivering the MFSP in various communities, but also assist MFRC Boards of Directors to determine the fair and equitable compensation of staff engaged in the provision of the MFSP mandated services. Look for more information as work on this project continues!