Presentation on theme: "DOI 5-Level Performance Management System November 2004."— Presentation transcript:
DOI 5-Level Performance Management System November 2004
Coverage All DOI Bureaus & Offices Non-SES employees Temporary/Excepted service employees in appointments of 120 days or more
Implementation Policy effective October 4, 2004 90-day transition period Training of HR, Managers, Employees E-training available through DOI University. E-training mandatory for managers and supervisors Full implementation -- January 1, 2005
Transition Bureaus on October 1 – September 30 cycle Close out 2-level May re-establish 2-level during training phase Establish 5-level as soon as managers trained, and NLT December 31, 2004 Bureaus on April 1 – March 31 cycle Train managers Early close out and establish 5-level by December 31, 2004
Comparison Old 2 levels Critical Results Generic Performance Indicators De-linked from recognition New 5 levels Critical Elements Generic Standards which can be augmented Linked to recognition Requires strategic linkage
Development of EPAP (Employee Performance Appraisal Plan) Employee participation encouraged Established within 60 days No more than 5 performance elements All must be critical elements At least one element linked to a GPRA goal Mandatory element for supervisors/managers Established by rating official – no higher level review required Bureaus MAY establish 2 nd level supv review
Performance Standards Focused on results Credible measures quality, quantity, timeliness, cost-effectiveness, etc. Established at the Fully Successful level (minimum required) Benchmark (generic) standards provided at all levels May be augmented with standards specific to the position
Performance Standards Must allow for margin of error or deviation Must be able to exceed the standard Must clearly state measurement criteria Use benchmark as a guide
Appraisal Period 12 months Coincides with FY Bureaus must request variation from DOI OHR May extend up to 90 days Progress reviews Required mid-year Continuous feedback encouraged
Basis for Appraisal Under signed performance plan for at least 90 days In same position Supervised by same rating official Includes details over 120 days Rating official must consider ratings from details
Annual Rating Completed within 30 days of end of appraisal period Original submitted to HRO within 60 days Copy to employee and supervisor Employee on temporary assignment Rating official is supervisor of record May NOT use arbitrary distribution system (such as a bell curve) Presumptive ratings not allowed Include narratives (required for E, MS & U)
Rating Individual Elements Rating LevelStandardPts ExceptionalParticularly excellent performance of such high quality that organizational goals have been achieved that would not have been otherwise… 5 SuperiorUnusually good performance that exceeds expectations in critical areas and exhibits a sustained support of organizational goals… 4 Fully Successful Good, sound performance that meets organizational goals. Employee effectively applies technical skills and organizational knowledge to get the job done… 3
Rating Individual Elements Rating LevelStandardPts Minimally Successful Performance shows serious deficiencies that require correction. Work is marginal and only meets the minimum requirements with close supervision… 2 UnsatisfactoryQuality and quantity of work are not adequate for the position. Work products do not meet the minimum requirements expected… 0
Annual Summary Rating Derived from numerical average of all elements Summary Rating PointsSummary Rating 4.60 - 5.00 AND No critical element lower than ‘Superior’ Exceptional 3.60 – 4.59 AND No critical element lower than ‘Fully Successful’ Superior 3.00 – 3.59 AND No critical element lower than ‘Fully Successful’ Fully Successful 2.00 – 2.99 AND No critical element rated lower than “Minimally Successful’ Minimally Successful One or more Critical elements rated ‘Unsatisfactory’ Unsatisfactory
Special Circumstances Supervisor of record leaves in final 90 days of rating period Prepare summary rating to serve as rating of record Employee does not have standards Not eligible for rating Employee not supervised by rating official for 90 days Second level supervisor may rate
Special Circumstances (cont’d) Interim appraisals Upon completion of temp assignment over 120 days Employee or supervisor changes positions Document level of competence for WIGI Becomes rating of record Copy to employee and new supervisor Used to determine annual summary rating “Not Rated” When employee does not have opportunity to perform a critical element
Finalizing Ratings Discuss with employee AFTER rating completed (and approved if E, MS or U) If employee refuses to sign Document refusal on rating form Supplemental written comments May be submitted by employee May address element rating, overall rating, and/or narrative comments Only when not contesting rating that would change RoR Forwarded to HRO and filed in EPF
Reconsideration Process Bureaus/Offices may develop their own process Criteria: Dissatisfaction with an element rating that would affect the Summary Rating CBA with reconsideration process governs Must notify all employees of the reconsideration process developed Reconsideration Process must include: Informal and Formal procedures Reasonable timeframes Final decision must remain within Bureau/Office
DOI PROPOSED Informal Reconsideration Process Informal discussion with rating official within 7 calendar days of receipt of the EPAP No agreement – employee may request formal reconsideration through HRO Rating Official provides decision Verbal or written Provided within 7 calendar days after discussion
DOI PROPOSED Formal Reconsideration Process Written request to HRO within 7 calendar days of receipt of informal decision HRO reviews to determine if appropriate for acceptance Not accepted – return with explanation Accepted – referred within 14 calendar days Employee may be represented Review limited to reconsideration of rating on critical element(s) that will impact the RoR
DOI Proposed Formal Reconsideration Process Reconsideration Official Reviews evidence Consults with necessary individuals Makes changes if appropriate Issues final written decision within 20 calendar days Copy to employee and filed in EPF Decision is final – no further right of review
Results of the Performance Rating Process Summary RatingNarrative required? Award Eligibility & Actions Required ExceptionalYESEligible for a cash award up to 5% of base pay, Time-Off, up to 5% increase in base pay (QSI or HCPF) SuperiorNoEligible for cash (up to 3% of base pay) or Time-Off award Fully SuccessfulNOEligible for WIGI or career ladder promotion Minimally Successful YESNot eligible for WIGI UnsatisfactoryYESRequires formal corrective action (Performance Improvement Plan)
Guidance 370 DM 430, Performance Management System Performance Appraisal Handbook Any questions should be directed to your servicing HRO. Policy, Handbook and Form available at http://www.doi.gov/hrm/guidance/curronl y.htm
ACCESSING THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM COURSE THROUGH THE INTERNET Log into the DOI University Learning Management System (LMS) Go to http://www.doiu.nbc.gov Click on “DOIU Login”
Employee Performance Appraisal Plan (EPAP)
Performance Standards Form Sally Smart 000-00-0000 Visitor Use Assistant, GS-303-05 Grand Canyon NP01/01/05 09/30/05
Part A Sally Smart 010105 V. Good 01/01/05
Part B Sally Smart V. Good 05/01/05
Part C 5 4 3 NR 5 17 4.254
Part D X Sally Smart V. Good 10/15/05 Check Here If Interim Rating _____
Interim Ratings Employee changes positions Employee completes temporary assignment or detail of more than 120 days The rating official leaves a supervisory position more than 90 days before the end of the rating cycle To document a level of competence determination for granting or denying a with- in-grade increase
Critical Elements Were formerly the Critical Results 1 + 1 2
Standard Element #1 Standard Element #2 Strategic Goals (GPRA)
SMART TECHNIQUE S pecific M easurable A chievable R ealistic T imely
Part E: Critical Elements and Performance Standards: List below each of the employee’s critical elements (at least one, but no more than 5) and their corresponding performance standards. If Benchmark Standards are used, indicate “Benchmark Standards are attached” in the space below, and ensure they are attached to this form. ______________________________________________________________________ Critical Element 1: ____________________________________________________________________ Park restrooms are maintained in a clean, sanitary and well- stocked manner. Facilities are in compliance health and safety standards, which contributes to visitor satisfaction. NPS Strategic Plan Goals IIa1A Visitor Satisfaction with Facilities, Services and Recreation, and IVa10A&B Facility Condition of Historic and Non-Historic Buildings.
Performance Standards Performance indicators in the Pass/Fail System Exceptional Superior Fully Successful Minimally Successful Unsatisfactory
Standard Element #1 Standard Element #2 Strategic Goals (GPRA)
Standards - Benchmarks Fully Successful – The employee demonstrates good, sound performance that meets organizational goals. All critical activities are generally completed in a timely manner and supervisor is kept informed of work issues, alterations and status.
Performance Standards ______________________________________________________________________ Exceptional ______________________________________________________________________ Superior ______________________________________________________________________ Fully Successful ______________________________________________________________________ Minimally Successful ______________________________________________________________________ Unsatisfactory ______________________________________________________________________ Refer to attached benchmark and in addition: Employee generally keeps to cleaning schedules in a manner that avoids obvious deterioration of facilities or allows the cleaning schedule to fall obviously behind. Overall appearance of facilities very seldom reflects adversely on the park.
Exercise 1 In your participant handbook on pages 7-10. There are 4 examples with the critical element and the standard at the fully successful level. Your task is to write a level description at either the exceptional, or unsatisfactory level as assigned below.
Your task is to write a level description at either the exceptional, or unsatisfactory level as assigned below. Alaska Region – Custodial Worker - Exceptional Pacific West Region – Custodial Worker - Unsatisfactory Intermountain Region – Visitor Use Assistant - Exceptional Midwest Region – Visitor Use Assistant - Unsatisfactory Southeast Region – Interpreter - Exceptional Northeast – Interpreter - Unsatisfactory National Capital Region & WASO – Program Assistant - Exceptional The Centers (DSC, HFC) - Program Assistant - Unsatisfactory BLM – Program Assistant - Exceptional FWS – Custodial Worker - Exceptional
Custodial Worker Level 5 Standard - Refer to benchmark and in addition: Employee sets standard for excellence in maintaining restrooms. Continually keeps abreast of heavy use periods and adjusts schedules as necessary to keep facilities in a sanitary and well-stocked manner. Anticipates problems relative to the conditions of the restrooms and either resolves the problem independently or alerts higher levels of management and offers workable solutions. Overall appearance of facilities consistently reflects favorably on the park.
Custodial Worker Level 1 Standard – Refer to benchmark and in addition: May fail to keep to established cleaning schedules, resulting in obvious deterioration of facilities and an inability to catch up. Overall appearance of facilities may frequently reflect negatively on the park.
Level 5 Standard - Refer to benchmark and in addition: Employee sets the standard for excellence in delivering formal interpretive programs. Programs are thoroughly researched and are based on the most current sound scholarship available to the park. Research encompasses a number of viewpoints (3 or more) to accommodate a wide variety of audiences. Program development is derived from park primary themes, is consistently successful as a catalyst in creating opportunities for the audience to form their own connections with the meanings and significance inherent in the resource, and demonstrates a fully developed theme. All programs fully utilize professional techniques in public speaking and presentation and exhibit excellence in the delivery of formal interpretive programs Interpreter
Level 1 Standard - Refer to benchmark and in addition: Programs reflect little research and only some of the current sound scholarship available to the park; no in-depth research is completed. Research encompasses only one viewpoint and does not accommodate a wider audience. Program development derives little from park primary themes, is generally not successful as a catalyst in creating opportunities for the audience to form their own connections with the meanings and significance inherent in the resource, and does not demonstrate a developed theme. Few programs exhibit professional techniques in public speaking and presentation.
Program Assistant Level 5 Standard – Refer to benchmark and in addition: Employee sets standard for excellence in time and attendance processing and maintenance. Coding of time and attendance sheets is nearly perfect and corrections due to timekeeper error are seldom, if ever, necessary. Timesheets are consistently submitted to the payroll office early. Time and attendance records are maintained in strict accordance with FPPS guidelines, with appropriate documentation for leave taken. Employee proactively addresses timekeeping issues with employees serviced or brings to supervisor’s attention for resolution. Employee is the “recognized” expert and is the person other timekeepers go to for advice and assistance. In these situations, employee is very responsive and helpful to their requests without neglecting his/her own duties and responsibilities.
Program Assistant Level 1 Standard - Refer to benchmark and in addition: Coding of time and attendance sheets may frequently be inaccurate due to errors in coding or failure to ensure accuracy of data, resulting in the need for corrections due to timekeeper error. Employee may often require help with processing and maintaining time and attendance records. Time and attendance records may frequently be maintained in contradiction to FPPS guidelines. Deadlines for timesheet submission may commonly be missed. May fail to assure that leave taken is recorded in time to assure acceptable accuracy or facilitate reporting. Situations may frequently occur in which the normal workflow and routine processing of time and attendance sheets is interrupted or employees are adversely affected as a result of improper or ineffective maintenance of timesheets.
Visitor Use Assistant Level 5 Standard - Refer to benchmark and in addition: Employee sets standard for excellence in fee collection activities. Within scope of authority and within the limitations of the specific situations encountered, assures that individuals required to pay entrance fees do so. Tactfully handles difficult communication issues with angry or frustrated visitors and consistently finds workable solutions to defuse tense situations. Consistently issues and records park passes at time of issuance in accordance with NPS policies and guidelines. Without fail handles monies, passports and records with adequate security to avoid theft or misplacement. Maintains reports and passport accountability records in accordance with NPS guidelines and policies.
Visitor Use Assistant Level 1 Standard – Refer to benchmark and in addition: May frequently fail to assure that individuals required to pay entrance fees do so. May communicate poorly in difficult situations, often becoming angry, rude or non- communicative when confronted by angry or frustrated visitors. May often fail to handle park passes in accordance with NPS guidelines and policies. May fail to provide adequate security for monies, passports and records to avoid theft or misplacement. May frequently fail to maintain reports and passport accountability records in accordance with NPS guidelines and policies. May routinely experience shortages, overages, or unnecessary voids after attempts at correction have failed.
Narrative Summary Must be completed for Exceptional, Minimally Successful and Unsatisfactory Level May be completed for the Superior and Fully Successful level Narrative Summary Describe the employee’s performance for each critical element. A narrative summary must be written for each element assigned a rating of Exceptional, Minimally Successful, or Unsatisfactory. Rating for Critical Element 2: [X ] Exceptional-5 [ ] Superior-4 [ ] Fully Successful-3 [ ] Minimally Successful-2 [ ] Unsatisfactory-0
Next Steps Complete DOI’s web-based training on EPAP Complete Employee Performance Plan and Results Report for Rating Period of 10/1/03- 12/31/04 Establish Critical Elements for new Performance Plan (EPAP) Define at a minimum the fully successful level of each Critical Element Share draft with employee and get feedback Finalize and implement EPAP by January 1, 2005