This page includes part 1 of the report, which covers the introduction and demographic overview of the workforce. Part 2 of the report includes information about employment actions (e.g., hires, separations, and other HR actions).
Introduction
This report analyzes workforce demographics and employment trends in Multnomah County from fiscal years 2022 to 2024 (July 1, 2021 - June 30, 2024) using data from Workday, the HR system of record used by the County. The report covers information about County workforce demographics, as well as employment actions (including hire, separation, promotion, demotion, reclassification, lead status, limited duration assignment, and work out of class). This report answers questions such as:
- How many people were hired by or left the County during these fiscal years?
- What are the demographics of the County workforce (including race and ethnicity, disability status, gender, generation, sexual orientation, and veteran status)?
- Are there statistically significant differences in employment actions across different demographic groups?
- The report may also be helpful in answering questions related to other County initiatives, such as the Workforce Equity Strategic Plan (WESP). For example, is the workforce becoming more racially and ethnically diverse?
While much of the descriptive information presented in this report is also available on the quarterly Employment Trends dashboards, the report goes further by identifying trends and statistically testing group differences to determine if the results are significant. Statistical significance means that a given result is not likely to be due to random chance.[1] However, it is also important to note that statistical significance (and our confidence in the results) is impacted by group size; we are often less likely to determine statistical significance for smaller groups. At the same time, a lack of statistically significant findings does not rule out underlying issues or disparities.
Additionally, the data presented here represent the employment actions and demographics of employees as recorded and available in Workday. Not all demographic information is available for all employees since some have not filled out this section of their employee profile (You can help by updating your information). While this may simply be an overlooked step, it could also indicate instances where County employees do not feel safe reporting on their personal identities. Still, employees have the option to select “prefer not to answer” for most demographic questions, and even this response helps us better understand why people are not responding.
Our ability to perform analyses is also affected when there is no demographic data available for large groups of employees (particularly disability status, gender, sexual orientation, and veteran status). Sex and gender are collected in two different fields in Workday: 1) a limited option field (female, male, and non-binary) and 2) a more inclusive "gender identity" field. While we analyzed both fields, the limited option field had more complete data, but does not represent the full (and therefore more accurate) picture of the identities that exist within our workforce.
Finally, this report does not document all events or actions that may have impacted employment trends, as there are myriad factors — including personal, County, and external events beyond the County’s influence — that could contribute to the findings. The County and its employees are embedded within the larger framework of the state, nation, and world, as well as entwined in formal and informal networks and relationships. While this report does not explicitly describe or attribute those conditions and events (e.g., economic shifts and uncertainty, a post-COVID emergency response rebound, a tumultuous political landscape) in relation to these findings due to their complexity and variability, it should be acknowledged that this broader context does continue to impact the County’s work, operations and its workforce.
Workforce Overview and Demographics
Size of the workforce
The size of the County workforce grew by over 500 people between FY 2020 and FY 2024, with most of the growth occurring in FY 2022 and remaining relatively stable since then. During this time, the proportion of regular employees (employees who are in an ongoing, budgeted position) has continued to be high, hovering around 80% of all employees.
| Fiscal year and number of total employees | Number of Employees | Percent of regular employees | Percent of other types of employees (e.g., temporary, limited duration, intern, seasonal) |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY 2020 | 6,528 | 81.3% | 18.7% |
| FY 2021 | 6,733 | 77.6% | 22.4% |
| FY 2022 | 6,636 | 83.1% | 16.9% |
| FY 2023 | 7,039 | 84.2% | 15.8% |
| FY 2024 | 7,023 | 83.0% | 17.0% |
Ratio of frontline staff to management staff
For this report, frontline staff are defined as those who do not manage other employees, whereas supervisors and managers are those who do have managerial responsibilities. In FY 2024, the ratio of frontline staff to management for all employees was 8:1 (6,330 frontline staff and 800 supervisors and managers). In other words, there were 8 frontline staff for every 1 management position across the whole workforce. For the regular workforce, this ratio was 7:1 (5,170 frontline staff and 757 supervisors and managers).
Managers who supervise too many staff may become overburdened, less able to support each employee appropriately, and their employees may be less engaged. On the other hand, having managers who supervise relatively few employees may indicate that positions are not allocated effectively and that communication, as well as decision making, may be slower across teams.[2]
The appropriate ratio for an organization varies depending on the diversification of tasks, time and stability of job, and size and space (geographic distribution) of the workforce.[3] However, some research suggests that seven direct reports allows for the manager to support employees appropriately while still allowing for efficient communication, decision making, and use of organizational resources.[4] This aligns with the current County’s ratio.
For many departments, the ratio for regular employees is similar to the countywide ratio (7:1), with most departments having a ratio falling between 6:1 and 9:1. The District Attorney’s Office had a larger ratio (indicating fewer management employees compared to frontline staff), whereas both the Department of County Management (DCM) and Homeless Services Department (HSD) had lower ratios (both 4:1). However, DCM houses leadership positions that cross many departments, so this may not be indicative of the actual operational structure within the department. When senior managers and leadership are excluded, the DCM ratio is aligned with other departments (9:1). Additionally, HSD has only recently become its own department and its structure is still maturing. While its ratio is currently low, this may change over time as additional structural changes are made.
| Department | Number of regular frontline employees | Number of regular frontline supervisors and managers | Ratio of frontline staff to managers |
|---|---|---|---|
| District Attorney’s Office (DA) | 247 | 18 | 14:1 |
| Department of County Assets (DCA) | 348 | 52 | 7:1 |
| Department of County Human Services (DCHS) | 919 | 106 | 9:1 |
| Department of Community Justice (DCJ) | 418 | 46 | 9:1 |
| Department of County Management (DCM) | 247 | 65 | 4:1* |
| Department of Community Services (DCS) | 201 | 33 | 6:1 |
| Health Department (HD) | 1391 | 209 | 7:1 |
| Homeless Services Department (HSD) | 84 | 24 | 4:1 |
| Multnomah County Library (LIB) | 524 | 76 | 7:1 |
| Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) | 733 | 119 | 6:1 |
* DCM leadership includes operations that oversee countywide operations, not just DCM. The ratio without senior managers and leadership is 9:1.
Diversity index for race and ethnicity
A diversity index measures how likely it would be for two individuals chosen at random from a group to identify as the same race or ethnicity. This measures not only the individual race and ethnicity categories, but also how diverse the group is as a whole. The diversity index scale ranges from 0 (no chance that the randomly chosen individuals would be from different race or ethnicity groups) to 10 (certainty that the randomly chosen individuals would be from different race or ethnicity groups). Higher values indicate more diversity.
An analysis of the diversity index of different groups revealed several notable results. For example, the diversity index by employee level shows that: 1) frontline, non-supervising employees remain the County’s most diverse segment of the workforce; 2) diversity has increased across all levels of the organization; and 3) the diversity of frontline supervisors has increased the most for all employee levels (+1.8% on the diversity index).
| Employee Level | Diversity index in FY 2020 | Diversity Index in FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Non-Supervising Frontline Staff | 5.6 | 6.2 |
| Frontline Supervisors | 4.8 | 5.9 |
| Middle Management | 5.2 | 5.6 |
| Senior Management & Leadership | 4.9 | 5.4 |
Seeing the shifts in each department’s diversity index over time can be helpful to understand if they are becoming more or less racially and ethnically diverse. As a reference, the greater Multnomah County area (all residents, not just employees) had a diversity index of 5.4 when the U.S. Census was published in 2020[5] — similar to the diversity index of the County workforce in the same year, which was 5.4 for all employees and 5.5 for regular employees only. Since then, the County has become even more racially and ethnically diverse, with a diversity index of 6.1 for all employees and 6.2 for regular employees only in FY 2024, making Multnomah County one of the most diverse large public employers in Oregon.
Similar to patterns seen in past studies, departments that focus on health and human services (the Department of County Human Services, Health Department, and Homeless Services Department (formerly the Joint Office of Homeless Services)) are the most diverse. And while the Sheriff’s Office has a relatively low diversity index, it has also continued to get more diverse over time. The Department of County Assets also has relatively low diversity, but their index has remained fairly similar across time.
| Diversity index of group: | FY 2020 | FY 2021 | FY 2022 | FY 2023 | FY 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| County Total, Regular Only | 5.5 | 5.7 | 5.9 | 6.1 | 6.2 |
| Department of Community Justice | 5.9 | 5.8 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 6.1 |
| Department of Community Services | 5.1 | 5.5 | 5.5 | 5.2 | 5.3 |
| Department of County Assets | 4.4 | 4.3 | 4.4 | 4.4 | 4.2 |
| Department of County Human Services | 6.4 | 6.5 | 6.7 | 7.0 | 7.1 |
| Department of County Management | 4.6 | 4.8 | 4.8 | 5.0 | 5.3 |
| District Attorney's Office | 5.3 | 5.3 | 5.3 | 6.1 | 6.2 |
| Health Department | 6.2 | 6.4 | 6.7 | 6.8 | 7.0 |
| Homeless Services Department | 5.1 | 6.5 | 7.2 | 7.0 | 6.8 |
| Library | 5.2 | 5.3 | 5.9 | 5.8 | 5.9 |
| Non-Departmental | 6.1 | 6.3 | 6.4 | 6.6 | 6.6 |
| Sheriff's Office | 3.8 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 4.1 | 4.3 |
Workforce demographics
The demographics of the workforce are changing in response to intentional recruitment efforts, reduction of barriers in hiring, general population shifts, and changing demographics of Multnomah County more generally. As a result of these efforts and external changes, the organization is becoming more diverse across multiple intersecting identities, and is in fact more racially and ethnically diverse than the Multnomah County community as a whole.
| Race or Ethnicity | County Workforce (FY 2024) | Multnomah County Population (2020 Census) |
|---|---|---|
| African | 0.9% | Not available in U.S. Census |
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 1.3% | 1.6% |
| Asian | 8.2% | 8.3% |
| Black or African American | 9.2% | 6.3% |
| Latino or Hispanic | 13.6% | 13.7% |
| Middle Eastern | 0.6% | Not available in U.S. Census |
| Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander | 0.8% | 0.7% |
| Slavic | 0.8% | Not available in U.S. Census |
| Two or More Races | 4.2% | 5.2% |
| White | 56.5% | 66.5% |
Employees from the Baby Boomer generation (those born between 1946 and 1964) are leaving the workforce in greater numbers, with their proportion of the regular workforce falling from 21.2% in FY 2020 to 12.4% in FY 2024. Conversely, Millennials (those born between 1981 and 1996) and Gen Z employees (those born between 1997 and 2012) make up an increasingly larger proportion of the workforce. While Millennials will likely remain relatively stable from this point forward, the workforce will continue to see greater representation among Gen Z employees as they continue to age into the workforce. This means that the importance of succession planning and the support of Gen Z employees will become increasingly more important.[6] The proportion of Gen X employees (those born between 1965 and 1980) has remained relatively stable over time.
Many of the demographic categories in Workday, the County’s human resource information system (HRIS), have a low rate of completion. This results in high levels of missing information — specifically within the disability status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and veteran status fields. The reasons for missing information are varied, but the primary cause is likely that employees simply do not know they can provide this information in Workday. Further, employees who do not wish to provide this information can still select a “prefer not to answer” for all fields, which for the purposes of analyses is more helpful than no response at all. Over time, more employees are filling out this information, which will be helpful for more accurate and complete analyses in the future.
Graphs and tables are available to provide the demographic information for the regular County workforce recorded in Workday between FY 2020 and FY 2024. (This information can also be viewed interactively on the Multnomah County Employment Trends Demographic Dashboard, which also allows for further disaggregation of demographic information by department, division, employee type, employee level, union, and telework status.)
Continue to Part 2: Hires, Separations, and other Employment Actions
[1] This is a somewhat simplified definition for readability. To learn more about statistical significance testing visit: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/statistically_significant.asp
[2] Hall, S. (n.d.). Span of Control Matters: How to Optimize Your Org Structure for Efficiency and Growth. One Model. Retrieved May 8, 2025, from https://www.onemodel.co/blog/span-of-control
[3] Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2003). Span of control and public organizations: Implementing Luther Gulick’s research design. Public Administration Review, 63(1), 61-70.
[4] Rabbolini, O. (2019, November 29). Servant leadership and the rule of seven. [Blog post]. The Startup. Retrieved from https://medium.com/swlh/servant-leadership-and-the-rule-of-seven-27e516017b66
[5] United States Census Bureau. "Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the U.S.: 2010 Census and 2020 Census." August 12, 2021. Available at: https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/racial-and-ethnic-diversity-in-the-united-states-2010-and-2020-census.html
[6] Donelan, Chloe. "Gen Z In The Workplace: How Should Companies Adapt?" Johns Hopkins University, Imagine Center, 18 April 2023. Retrieved from: https://imagine.jhu.edu/blog/2023/04/18/gen-z-in-the-workplace-how-should-companies-adapt/