 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Are the performance rating, the rating of record, and the summary level the same thing? |
||||||||
|
Who can determine the rating of record? Who can sign ratings of record? |
||||||||
|
Can a rating of record ever be given at a time other than the end of the appraisal period? |
||||||||
|
When can an acceptable level of competence determination be delayed? |
||||||||
|
A critical element is a work assignment or responsibility of such importance that unacceptable performance on that element would result in a determination that an employee's overall performance is unacceptable. The regulations require that employees have at least one critical element in their performance plans. Critical elements must address performance at the individual level only.
Are the performance rating, the rating of record, and the summary level the same thing? No, but they are very similar. A performance rating is the appraisal of the employee's performance compared to the elements and standards established in the performance plan. The rating of record is a specific performance rating done at the end of the appraisal period that includes the appraisal of the elements and standards and also must include the assignment of a summary level (Levels 1-5). Performance ratings done at times other than the end of the appraisal period (such as at the mid-year review, for promotion panels, or similar situations) do not require a summary level to be assigned, although one is permitted. So, while the rating of record is often associated only with the summary level that is assigned as part of the process, it actually goes beyond that and provides a written, or otherwise recorded, record of the employee's performance on all elements in the performance plan during the applicable appraisal period.
Does an employee have to have a performance rating or a rating of record of unacceptable before a performance-based action can be taken? No, not at all. Both a performance rating and a rating of record involve the evaluation of an employee's performance against all the elements and standards in the performance plan. At any time during the appraisal period, an agency can make the determination that an employee's performance is unacceptable on one or more critical elements. This determination is sufficient to begin the process that could lead to a performance-based action if the employee's performance fails to improve to an acceptable level.
Must the rating of record be derived and the summary level assigned only on the basis of the appraisal of performance elements and standards in the employee's performance plan? Yes. The statute at section 4302(b)(3) of title 5, United States Code, requires that employees be evaluated against their performance standards.
Who can determine the rating of record? Who can sign ratings of record? The regulations are silent on these issues. Generally, ratings of record should be based on the input from an individual or individuals who are in the best position to assess performance. Agency programs will identify who prepares the rating of record and whose signature may appear on official documentation.
Can a rating of record ever be given at a time other than the end of the appraisal period? Yes. The regulations define a rating of record as the performance rating completed at the end of the appraisal period that reflects performance over the entire period, or an off-cycle rating of record given when a within-grade increase (WGI) decision is not consistent with the employee's most recent rating of record and a more current rating of record must be prepared. These are the only times that a rating of record can be issued.
Is there a minimum appraisal period? Yes. An agency program must specify the length of its minimum period and that minimum must fall within any limits established by the agency appraisal system. However, the outcomes of performance appraisals are applied in other personnel areas, and these applications create some practical limits for minimum periods. For example, the regulations and statutory waiting periods for granting the within-grade pay increase for General Schedule and Prevailing Rate System employees rely on a determination that the employee's performance merits the pay adjustment. Prevailing Rate System employees with a work performance rating of satisfactory or better are advanced from step 1 to step 2 after 26 weeks, which implies that their performance must be ratable before that. Consequently, and without taking into consideration the nature of the work itself, the practical outside limit for the minimum period for prevailing rate employees is roughly 180 days. In addition, the minimum period is one of the program features that may be subject to third-party review. Agencies are advised to be careful in determining the time limits to be used and avoid setting minimum periods that might be judged unreasonably short.
When can an acceptable level of competence determination be delayed? An acceptable level of competence determination can be delayed for only two reasons:
Can you delay a within-grade determination while an employee completes a performance improvement period (PIP) if no rating of record was given at the beginning of the PIP? No. The regulations specifically restrict the delay of a within-grade determination to the two conditions stated in the regulations (and reviewed in the previous question). Consideration was given to permitting the delay of a within-grade determination for employees completing a PIP, but the decision was made not to allow this since it would give an unfair advantage to an employee whose performance has been determined to be unacceptable (a condition upon which the PIP is based) over employees whose most recent rating of record is Level 2 (marginal, minimally successful, etc.) and who are not eligible for a within-grade increase. There is no requirement to give an employee a rating of record before beginning a PIP. If a within-grade increase determination is due during an employee's PIP, the agency needs to make sure it reviews the employee's most recent rating of record and determines whether a new rating of record is needed to support the within-grade decision. If the last rating of record does not support the within-grade determination (i.e., the rating was Level 3 (Fully Successful or equivalent) or better and performance later reached the unacceptable level triggering the PIP), a new rating of record must be given to support a denial of the within-grade increase. If the agency chooses to use the last rating of record of Level 3 (Fully Successful or equivalent) or better and grant the within-grade, they need to realize they are certifying the employee as performing at that level and jeopardizing any future performance-based action that might have been based on performance during that time period.
|
||||||||
