How Study Scope and Price Are Set
A municipal classification and compensation study should leave the city able to explain how positions were evaluated, why comparator employers were selected, and what each implementation scenario would cost. Faulkner HR Solutions scopes the position inventory, description condition, public-safety work, comparator approach, meetings, communication needs, and revision rounds before quoting the fixed fee.
The city's part in delivery: designate a project contact, reconcile the position and pay inventory, obtain department input on actual duties, and involve finance in funding scenarios. We conduct the scoped evaluation and market work and present the method and recommendations. The city retains procurement, methodology approval, compensation decisions, and council approval authority.
From study to adoption: the base study supplies analysis, pay-plan design, administration rules, cost scenarios, and council presentation. Processing pay changes, individual appeals, job-description writing, and annual maintenance are separately quoted. Agree those boundaries and department review dates before the study begins; the base-scope timeline is 90–120 days.
Reviewed August 30, 2026 by Dr. Thomas W. Faulkner, DBA, SPHR. Procurement method and approval authority remain with the municipality and its advisors.
Why Small Texas Cities Skip the Study They Need
Most Texas cities under 300 employees know their pay plan is out of date. They have also seen the proposals, and the proposals do not fit the budget.
So the plan gets patched. A market adjustment for the position that would not fill. A reclassification for the department head who threatened to leave. A step adjustment in the year revenue allowed it. Each approved on its own merits, none referenced against a structure.
Five years of that produces exactly what a study prevents: a pay plan nobody designed, that the finance director cannot explain in a budget workshop, and that a council member eventually asks about in open session. Those patches map directly onto the Compression Origin Taxonomy — most municipal compression is C1 Recruitment Override and C3 Promotion Underfunding stacked across budget cycles.
The pressure behind the patching is documented. In the 2025 State and Local Government Workforce Survey, 70% of governments named competitive compensation a critical priority, down from 79% the prior year — a decline researchers attribute to salary increases granted in preceding years. Those increases were largely reactive, granted role by role under recruitment pressure.
Source: MissionSquare Research Institute with PSHRA and NASPE, 2025 State and Local Government Workforce Survey.
Is Your City Ready to Commission a Study?
Studies overrun and get repriced for predictable reasons, and every one of them is visible before procurement. Faulkner HR Solutions publishes the readiness conditions so a city can check its own position before issuing an RFP — including an RFP that goes to somebody else.
| Condition | What goes wrong without it |
|---|---|
| Position inventory reconciled to the current budget document | A study priced against a stale position count is repriced mid-engagement. |
| Position descriptions current within 24 months, or flagged as stale | Point-factor evaluation of a stale description evaluates a job nobody holds. |
| Comparator philosophy adopted before the survey is fielded | Changing comparators after fielding means fielding again. |
| Pay plan governance documented — who approves what, at what threshold | Recommendations that exceed the approving body's authority cannot be implemented. |
| Public safety scope decided explicitly, including 207(k) treatment | Work-period review is separate analysis and is routinely assumed to be included. |
| Implementation funding scenario range agreed with finance in advance | A single-number recommendation with no phased option is frequently unfundable. |
| Elected-office and independently-appointed positions identified | Counties and some cities carry positions the governing body does not fully control. |
| Communication plan owner named before results exist | Results leak. The absence of a plan is itself the plan. |
What the Study Includes
Position analysis questionnaires and job content review for every position in scope. What the role does now, rather than what the description said when it was written.
Structured evaluation across compensable factors—knowledge required, supervision exercised and received, complexity of decisions, accountability, and working conditions. The reasoning is documented and applied consistently; that supports review and appeal without guaranteeing an outcome.
Survey against an agreed comparator list — jurisdictions you actually compete with for people, which for most Texas cities means a population band within a defined radius, adjusted for role families with wider labor markets.
Grades, ranges, and the administration rules most plans omit: above-range treatment, promotional increases, progression, and how the plan gets maintained so this does not recur every eight years.
Full implementation, phased implementation across two or three budget cycles, and a baseline showing the cost of no action. Council does not approve a pay philosophy. Council approves a number.
Delivered, including the questions councils reliably ask: why this position scores above that one, why these comparator cities, and what the recommendation does to the tax rate.
Market-data standard: the report records comparator logic, source and effective date, survey response, aging method, geographic or role-family adjustments, match quality, and sample limitations. If a market match is weak, it is labeled rather than presented as precise.
Decision and communication standard: the project assigns who approves methodology, comparator changes, classification decisions, pay-plan rules, cost scenarios, employee communication, and appeals. Employees receive a defined route for questions or classification appeals when that scope is included.
What Is Not Included
Published so it is settled before the engagement rather than during it. Each is available and separately quoted.
- Implementing the plan or processing pay changes
- Individual position appeals or reclassification hearings
- Writing job descriptions for classified positions
- Benefits benchmarking
- Meet-and-confer or association negotiation
- Annual plan maintenance
- FLSA 207(k) work-period review for police and fire
Public Safety, Special Districts, and Counties
Police and fire positions can be included in the classification study. Work-period designation and overtime threshold review under FLSA 207(k) is separate analysis, because it examines scheduling and overtime practice rather than classification and pay level. Cities frequently need both, and the readiness standard above exists partly because this scope question is the one most often assumed rather than decided.
Special districts — water, wastewater, utility, hospital — compete for licensed and certified operators against labor markets that often extend beyond the region, which changes comparator logic.
Counties carry elected-official offices with independent hiring authority. A study has to address structure the commissioners court does not fully control, and say so plainly rather than producing recommendations nobody can implement.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does a classification and compensation study cost for a Texas city?
The fixed fee depends on position count, description condition, public-safety scope, comparator approach, required meetings, employee communication and appeals, implementation scenarios, and revision rounds. Faulkner HR Solutions confirms those assumptions and the fee in a signed scope of work before the study begins.
How long does a classification and compensation study take?
Ninety to 120 days for a base-scope study. The variable is how quickly position questionnaires return from department heads, which is why both the timeline and the questionnaire deadline appear in the scope of work.
What methodology do you use?
Point-factor evaluation documents and applies compensable factors consistently across in-scope positions. The market survey combines identified published sources with direct comparator collection where included. Documentation supports review and appeal but does not guarantee that a challenge will fail.
How are comparator jurisdictions selected?
Together, at kickoff, based on where you actually lose candidates and where your candidates actually come from — usually a population band within a defined radius, adjusted for role families with wider markets. The list is fixed before the survey is fielded, because changing comparators afterward means fielding it again.
What is the difference between a classification study and a compensation study?
Classification determines the relative internal value and grade of each position. Compensation determines what those grades should pay relative to the market. Most jurisdictions need both, which is why they are procured together — a market number applied to a broken classification structure produces a broken pay plan faster.
What happens if council does not approve the recommendations?
That outcome is planned for. Cost scenarios can include phased implementation and a current-state baseline. Before using recommendations in a later budget cycle, the city should review market-data effective dates, material workforce changes, and whether a refresh is required.
Does the study include public safety?
Police and fire positions can be classified within the study. FLSA 207(k) work-period review is separate analysis covering work periods, overtime thresholds, and comp-time practice. The Classification Study Readiness Standard treats this as a scope decision to make before procurement, because it is the item most often assumed to be included.
Related Services
Prepare a Study Scope Your City Can Review.
Bring the position count, condition of job descriptions, public-safety scope, and target budget or council date. We will identify the remaining inputs needed for a written study scope, schedule, and fixed-fee proposal.