Presented by AcqDemo Program Office

Presented by AcqDemo Program Office
DoD Civilian Acquisition Workforce Personnel Demonstration Project (AcqDemo) Contribution-based Compensation and Appraisal System (CCAS) for Supervisors Presented by AcqDemo Program Office FY2018

Course Outline Introduction Compensation Strategy CCAS Overview
Understanding Factors and Descriptors Writing An Annual Appraisal Assessing Employee Contributions & Quality of Performance Rewarding Employee Contributions Feedback on Contributions CAS2Net The Way Forward We have carefully chosen the topics listed here as what the workforce is most interested in understanding about AcqDemo. Certainly an overview of conversion activities to come in the next few months is one of them….how you will be classified and how positions can be filled is another, options for career growth and development provided under AcqDemo, and lastly, and I imagine most important to all of you is the appraisal and reward system which under AcqDemo is known as a contribution-based appraisal system. Then we’ll wrap up with a summary of things to come and where you can get help on any questions you may have later.

Introduction Housekeeping, Expectations and Parking Lot
Course Objectives Activity: System Advantages / Supervisor Concerns Don’t teach anything here, just list the topics

Housekeeping, Expectations and Parking Lot
Administration, Expectations and Parking Lot Administration Sign in Course Timing Introductions Expectations Parking Lot Ground Rules & Logistics Rest Rooms Breaks Cell Phones / Other Electronic Devices Questions and Parking Lot Review

Course Objectives At the completion of this course, participants will be able to: Summarize the major elements of the CCAS process Understand the supervisor’s role in implementing the organization’s compensation strategy Write a summary of employee contributions for the Annual Appraisal Apply scoring techniques to assess employee contributions and Quality of Performance Describe how final scores and associated rewards are determined Communicate CCAS results to employees These are the course objectives. Individual module topics will be addressed on the cover slide for each module.

Contribution and Compensation
Design Overview Another approach to performance management… two key differences: Designed to focus employees on creating impact Acquisition is a knowledge-based business; we depend on people to use their knowledge to advance mission performance Discussing expectations and individual contributions vs. performance objectives will be a different “contribution planning” conversation Shapes professional acquisition workforce by using three standard factors to score employee contributions Designed to align compensation with level of contribution Basic pay level translates to expected contribution level Assessed contribution level compared with expected contribution level to determine compensation eligibility Process software ensures equitable distribution of pay pool funds

Activity: System Advantages / Supervisor Concerns
Small Group Discussion: What do you view as the major advantages of a Contribution-based system? What are your biggest concerns / roadblocks for successfully supervising your employees in AcqDemo? Each team shares highlights with the class. Break students into groups of 5 or so. Have each group assign a note taker and presenter. Each group has 10 minutes of capture their thoughts to the two questions posed. Lead a group discussion around the results for no more than 10 minutes. Take notes/list on white board or chart paper to ensure all of their topic areas/concerns are addressed in class.

Compensation Strategy
What is a Compensation Strategy? Compensation Strategy Components Your Role in Implementing a Compensation Strategy This overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module. Hopefully this section will bring out the following points: The goal of an organization’s compensation strategy is consistency, which, in turn, should produce equity, revolving around the core elements of the strategy This organization-wide attention to compensation elevates the conversation to higher management levels in the organization Promotes compensation to strategic initiatives as opposed to an inflexible time based system; largely a line item in a budget These major points support the rest of the topics about compensation strategies.

What is a Compensation Strategy?
Reflects your organization’s strategic objectives Maintain mission excellence Attract new talent Retain and motivate existing employees Sets the general policies and procedures for compensation and benefits within an organization Consistent with pay budgets Used to derive rules for rewarding contributions Seeks to provide the right rewards for the right employee contributions Internal pay equity for like contributions Link rewards to contributions / impact

Compensation Strategy Components
Group Discussion What are your organization’s… Hiring strategies Pay Setting / Progression strategies Federal Pay vs. Private Sector Control points on positions Starting placement Progression through the broadband When to make pay related position changes? What levels of contribution should be rewarded? Questions to help lead discussion: Are you familiar with the competitive climate regarding the employees you lead? How competitive do you need to be with the local private sector marketplace? What is more important – internal pay equity or market competiveness? What motivates an employee? How can you compete if your salary rates are lower? What else can you offer? Do you have control points on positions? If so, what are the rules for moving through the quadrants? How can AcqDemo assist in that process? What is more helpful – more staff with less pay/skill or fewer more well paid, highly motivated staff? Are you making decisions based on the position or the person?

Your Role in Implementing a Compensation Strategy
Understand your organization’s compensation strategy Relate the compensation strategy to your work unit Set realistic expectations with employees Share concerns with higher level management for review with Personnel Policy Board Apply organization strategy in assessing employee contributions Set the proper expectations right at the start of each appraisal period for each individual.

CCAS Overview CCAS The CCAS Cycle
Roles of Supervisor, Employees, and Pay Pool Panel 11-Step CCAS Process This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module.

Contribution and Compensation Key Terms and Definitions
AcqDemo Personnel Policy Board (PPB) Expected Overall Contribution Score (EOCS) Expected Contribution Range (ECR) Overall Contribution Score (OCS) Performance Appraisal Quality Levels (PAQL) Contribution Rating Increase (CRI) Contribution Award (CA) General Pay Increase (GPI) Locality Pay CAS2Net Ok, perhaps our most important terminology differences in this module…we’ll look at the AcqDemo features closely in a minute. First and foremost what is this difference between performance based designs and contribution based designs? Performance Focus is on how well you performed objectives Ideal for well-defined more stable production environments Without proper controls, compensation is granted each year and inappropriate salary creep can result…we saw that happen with NSPS and it probably help lead to its repeal. Contribution Focus is on impact or benefit of results Better suited for environments where roles are less defined more fluid knowledge work-oriented environments Numeric and graphic depiction of employee placement within broadband helps to better guide compensation decisions Instead of 5 rating levels, AcqDemo uses a range of scoring which permits better distinction of level of contribution. The funding elements are similar in what they represent but are applied differently in how they are paid out.

The CCAS Cycle 2. Mid-Point Review Payout & End-of-Cycle Discussion
3. Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment Annual Appraisal New Cycle Begins Previous Cycle Discussion New Cycle Contribution Planning 5. Pay Pool Panel Payout & End-of-Cycle Discussion 2. Mid-Point Review Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep FEEDBACK The CCAS appraisal period follows the federal government fiscal year. Supervisor’s assessments must be stand-alone assessments and should no longer be just a supplement to the employee’s assessment.

Responsibilities of the Personnel Policy Board
Each Participating Organization will create a Personnel Policy Board, or modify the charter of an existing group, that will: Oversee the civilian pay budget Address issues associated with separate pay systems Determine the composition of the pay pools Review pay pool operations Provide guidance to pay pool managers Administer pay pool funding levels Review new hire and promotion pay Monitor award pool distributions Assess the need to modify local demonstration project procedures and policies Establish and monitor quality of performance process and results Publish local business rules Oversee the transition into AcqDemo

Responsibilities of the Pay Pool Panel
Review preliminary ratings for consistency and equity Reconcile preliminary ratings that are poorly documented or otherwise outside business rules Approve ratings of record and payout results Adjudicate challenges to ratings of record

Responsibilities of Supervisors
Review organizational goals and priorities at start of appraisal cycle Conduct annual contribution planning and explain Expected Contribution Range (ECR) Monitor and document employee progress and provide coaching/feedback throughout appraisal cycle Address contribution and/or performance issues immediately upon identification Provide mentoring for career development Conduct a formal Mid-Point Review Request Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment Complete an end-of-cycle Annual Appraisal Use factor descriptors to determine preliminary categorical scores and performance appraisal quality levels for pay pool Participate in pay pool process as required Conduct Annual Appraisal conversation What strategies do you have in place, or need to implement, in order to best drive the accomplishment of this year’s expected contributions?

Responsibilities of Employees
Understand and meet the contribution expectations identified during Contribution Planning Seek feedback and guidance as needed throughout the appraisal cycle Prepare a Mid-Point Review and Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment in accordance with local policy

11-Step CCAS Process Step 1 – Employee (optionally) completes Annual Appraisal Self- Assessment at the end of the rating period in accordance with local policy. Step 2 – Supervisor assesses employee contributions against three factors and assigns preliminary categorical scores and performance appraisal quality levels. Step 3 – First Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool meeting - review for equity, consistency, and grouping; adjustments are made, as necessary. Pay pool manager resolves problems. Step 4 – Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool Panel converts contribution matrix placement into numerical contribution scores. Step 5 – Second meeting of Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool Panel - identifies inconsistencies, makes adjustments, as appropriate. Step 6 – Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool Manager approves results, which become employee’s rating of record. These steps will be noted on slides throughout the remainder of the course where they intersect with the CCAS process

11-Step CCAS Process (Con’t.)
Step 7 – Plotted Pay vs. OCS data compares employee contribution to compensation, placing each employee in Normal, Overcompensated or Undercompensated region . Step 8 – Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool Manager and panel implement payout plan, using software tool to determine potential pay adjustment and contribution award for each employee. Step 9 – Pay Pool / Sub Pay Pool Panel reviews for consistency and fairness. Where no consensus can be reached, Pay Pool Manager makes final decision. Step 10 – Pay Pool Manager officially approves payout. Scores and pay adjustments are recorded on CCAS Appraisal Form Part I. Step 11 – Supervisor communicates results to each employee. Supervisor and employee sign CCAS Appraisal Form. Pay adjustments are effective first pay period in January.

Understanding Factors and Descriptors
Typical Acquisition Functions / Behaviors The 3 Factors Broadband-Specific Descriptors Relating Contributions to the Descriptors This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module. The main purpose here is to take a deep dive into the factors, descriptors and discriminators.

Origin of AcqDemo Factor Descriptors
Acquisition is a somewhat unique business environment within DoD Fluid changing requirements Roles not always rigidly defined Dependent on ability to solve problems, team with others, understand customer needs, lead, communicate, and manage resources Contributions of employees beyond job expectations lead to highly effective acquisition organizations Behaviors become the common denominator for evaluation A team was tasked with studying required acquisition workforce behaviors back when AcqDemo was being created. That study resulted in the creation of the factors, descriptors and discriminators. This slide is meant to give some insight as to how/why these particular items were created.

Factors Job Achievement and/or Innovation Communication and/or Teamwork Mission Support For contribution scoring purposes, the 3 factor scores are averaged to determine employee’s Overall Contribution Score (OCS) Job Achievement and/or Innovation - redefines the original Problem Solving and Leadership factors into a new unified construct Communication and/or Teamwork - the least changed factor and combines the individual original factors of the same names into one Mission Support - blends the original Problem Solving factor’s “Independence” discriminator with the original Resource Management Factor and Customer Relations Factor requirements, and also expands the conceptual requirements to link contributions on the job to the mission of the organization The factors, descriptors, and discriminators may not be modified. See AcqDemo Operating Guide, Chapter 6, Appendix B for a full list of Factor definitions, descriptors and discriminators. AcqDemo Operating Guide, Chapter 6, section 6.2, Introduction “CCAS is a contribution-based appraisal system that goes beyond a performance-based rating system. That is, it emphasizes and measures the value and effectiveness of the employee’s contribution to the mission and goals of the organization, rather than merely how well the employee performed a job as defined by a set of standards for the work to be accomplished. Past experience with the existing civilian performance appraisal system indicates that standards in performance plans are often tailored to the individual’s level of previous performance. Hence, an employee may have been rewarded by basic pay step increases meeting standards of performance beneath those actually needed to achieve the expected organizational mission outcomes. Under CCAS, an employee’s performance is a component of contribution that influences the employee’s ultimate overall expectations and contribution assessment. CCAS promotes basic pay adjustment decisions made on the basis of an individual’s overall annual contribution to the mission of the organization when compared to the classification and appraisal factors and an employee’s contribution plan, expected results, and the scope, level of difficulty, and value of the employee’s position. The three key components of CCAS are the appraisal process … , the Integrated Pay Schedule as a mechanism to relate contribution to pay, and the compensation adjustment results.”

The 3 Factors Job Achievement and/or Innovation - qualifications, critical thinking, calculated risks, problem solving, leadership, supervision, and personal accountability Communication and/or Teamwork - communication, both verbal and written; interactions with customers, coworkers, and groups; and assignments crossing functional boundaries Mission Support - understanding and execution of organizational goals and priorities; working with customers to develop a mutual understanding of their requirements; monitoring and influencing cost parameters or work, tasks, and projects; and establishing priorities that reflect mission and organizational goals Teamwork and Cooperation includes both formal and informal teams Customer Relations includes both internal and external customers Resources include, but are not limited to, personal time, equipment and facilities, human resources, and funds

Broadband-Specific Descriptors
Factor 3: Mission Support NH – Business Management & Technical Management Professional LEVEL DESCRIPTORS DISCRIMINATORS LEVEL III Anticipates problems, develops sound solutions and action plans to ensure program/mission accomplishment. Establishes customer alliances, anticipates and fulfills customer needs, and translates customer needs to programs/projects. Identifies and optimizes resources to accomplish multiple projects’/programs’ goals. Effectively accomplishes multiple projects’/programs’ goals within established guidelines. Independence Customer Needs Planning/Budgeting Execution/Efficiency LEVEL IV Defines, integrates, and implements strategic direction for vital programs with long-term impact on large numbers of people. Initiates actions to resolve major organizational issues. Promulgates innovative solutions and methodologies. Assess and promulgate, fiscal, and other factors affecting customer and program/project needs. Works with customer at management levels to resolve problems affecting programs/projects (e.g., problems that involve determining priorities and resolving conflicts among customers’ requirements). Formulates organizational strategies, tactics, and budget/action plan to acquire and allocate resources. Optimizes, controls, and manages all resources across projects/programs. Develops and integrates innovative approaches to attain goals and minimize expenditures. Here’s an example of the Communication factor. Note the differences in responsibility level between NH-III and NH-IV. Descriptors indicate the type of contribution appropriate for the high end of each broadband level. They are different for each broadband level, with increasing levels of contribution expected within each higher broadband. Descriptors are not to be used individually to assess contributions, but rather are to be taken as a group to derive a single evaluation of the factor. This are no modifications to the factors, descriptors or discriminators. For Every High Score descriptors, note that unlike the other descriptors these are written at the mid-level of the score range, so 110 for NH.

Relating Factors to Current Workload
Group Discussion What are the career paths and broadband levels of the employees who report to you? How do the factors and descriptors relate to those individuals and the work being done? Resource Management is sometimes a difficult factor to evaluate for certain positions. Use that factor as a starting point for discussion if the group does not become quickly engaged.

Writing an Annual Appraisal
Tools Annual Appraisal Self- Assessment Writing Effective Contribution Statements Activity: Writing an Annual Appraisal This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module.

Writing Tools Organization Mission/Goals PRD Contribution Plan
Factors, Descriptors and Discriminators Records kept throughout the year Mid-Point Review Additional Feedback Closeout Assessments Appraisal Form / CAS2Net Associated discussion questions in Participants’ Guide: How would these tools best be used? What other tools could be used effectively?

Keeping Records of Contributions
Written notes from employee meetings during the appraisal cycle Notes to yourself when employee deadlines are met / missed Written formal feedback provided to employee Notes to yourself about informal or verbal feedback provided Written or verbal feedback from colleagues / customers Other contribution documentation Highlight advantages of capturing verbal feedback throughout the year, in addition to any written feedback

Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment
Step 1 Optional but highly encouraged, subject to local policy Typically completed before you complete your Annual Appraisal May need more than one draft to best highlight the employee’s contributions Should highlight the contributions with the most impact made throughout the appraisal cycle Should describe contributions in concise statements Should use language that can be understood by all pay pool panel members Instructors: Check with your POC to see if Self-Assessments are optional or required prior to class.

Annual Appraisal Writing Steps
Review employee contribution planning documentation Review Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment Review Mid-Point Review / Additional Feedback documentation By factor, assess contributions against factor descriptors / discriminators Prepare succinct contribution impact statements for each factor Note: A contribution may warrant mention under more than one factor. 1st part of Step 2. It continues until the preliminary categorical score is assigned in the next module.

Contribution Statements
Begin with a named task, followed by results achieved, and ending with impact to the mission of the organization Be specific (use dollar figures, program names, time saved, percentages, etc.) For each statement, make sure it passes the “SO WHAT” test “Employee X did A that resulted in B, and the impact of that contribution was C.”

Ineffective Contribution Statements
Provided training logistical support for base activities. Served as key government representative on program change review board. Served as Acting Director of XYZ Program. Provided weekly status report to the PM on activities of the office. Reviewed and provided comments and recommendations on applying new or revised procurement regulations. Coordinated with our headquarters regarding these requirements and objectives. More examples, by factor, in Participants’ Guide

Effective Contribution Statements
Developed a computer program to track material storage and delivery of weapon system parts from the Supply Department to the Operating Forces. This tracking system cut reorder costs by 20% and improved delivery time on average by 20 days. (Job Achievement and/or Innovation) Coordinated with a number of organization elements and contractors to resolve a classified problem that resulted in the enhancement of operational security for all parties involved. This solution was adopted DoD-wide. (Cooperation and/or Teamwork) ~ See participant guide for more examples ~

Activity: Writing an Annual Appraisal
In small groups, review the background scenario provided. As a group, collectively write an Annual Appraisal for one of the factors. Present your group’s results to the rest of the class. Assign Mission Support as the factor for your groups to write about. Approximately a 25-minute activity.

Assessing Employee Contributions
Scoring Overview Determining Categorical Scores Determining Numerical Scores Determining Performance Appraisal Quality Levels Activity: Assessing Employee Contributions Special Situations This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module.

Sample Employee Joe Contributor NH-0801-III, General Engineer
Basic Pay - $82,750 Ok, let’s take you through an example of how someone’s contributions are assessed under CCAS….

Expected Contribution Range Calculator
Calculate an Expected Contribution Range (ECR) at the beginning of the appraisal period using a calculator found at the AcqDemo website: Basic Pay Only To help employees and managers, there is a tool on the website which calculates that for you. Simply enter the salary, career path, and broadband level and it calculates your expected contribution range. This tool will be updated to match the Pay Retention policies as soon as they are finalized.

Broadband Level Score Ranges
Categorical NH Point Range NJ Point Range NK Point Range Very High High 115 95 70 IV Med 110 91 67 Low 105 87 64 96 – 100 79 – 83 -- 84 – 95 67 – 78 61 – 66 III 62 – 66 57 – 61 52 – 61 47 – 56 43 – 51 38 – 46 II 47 – 51 42 – 46 Med High 51 – 61 41 – 46 41 – 50 36 – 40 30 – 41 Med Low 30 – 40 30 – 35 22 –29 22 – 29 I 24 – 29 06 – 23 00 – 05 Point values are distributed across the range of salaries from GS-1, step 1 to GS-15, Step 10. At the beginning of each CCAS cycle, every employee is provided their expected score based on their current salary level. This is adjusted after the pay pool process in January for those employees receiving a CRI (salary increase). There are a number of important pieces of information on this slide: Categorical and Numerical scores are shown. Be sure to point out both. Notice how the higher levels in the broadband have higher score expectations – this is because higher levels have higher salary potential. The very high is for employees who start at the highest broadband level to proved opportunity to recognize their contributions. 4. Note additional categories for Broadband 2 employees.

Determining Categorical Scores – Step 1
Step 1: Know the employee’s assigned broadband level. Review the Factors, Descriptors and Discriminators of that level, as well as the next higher and lower broadband levels Determine which broadband level (I, II, II or IV) best describes the employee’s contributions for the rating cycle Classification Level and Appraisal Descriptors BB Level OCS Range FACTOR - Mission Support (NH) Defines, integrates, and implements strategic direction for vital programs with long-term impact on large numbers of people. Initiates actions to resolve major organizational issues. Promulgates innovative solutions and methodologies. Assess and promulgate fiscal and other factors affecting customer and program/project needs. Works with customer at management levels to resolve problems affecting programs/projects (e.g., problems that involve determining priorities and resolving conflicts among customers’ requirements). Formulates organizational strategies, tactics and budget/action plan to acquire and allocate resources. Optimizes, controls, and manages all resources across projects/programs. Develops and integrates innovative approaches to attain goals and minimize expenditures. IV Very High 115 110 105 High Medium Low Anticipates problems, develops sound solutions and action plans to ensure program/mission accomplishment. Establishes customer alliances, anticipates and fulfills customer needs, and translates customer needs to programs/projects. Identifies and optimizes resources to accomplish multiple projects’/programs’ goals. Effectively accomplishes multiple projects’/programs’ goals within established guidelines. III Identifies and resolves conventional problems which may require deviations from accepted policies or instructions. Initiates meetings and interactions with customers to understand customer needs/expectations. Optimizes resources to accomplish projects/programs within established schedules. Effectively accomplishes projects’/programs’ goals within established resource guidelines. II Medium High Medium Low 22 – 29 Performs assigned tasks within area of responsibility; identifies situations to supervisor or other appropriate personnel when existing guidelines do not apply. Participates as a team member in meeting customer needs. Productively plans individual time and assigned resources to accomplish tasks. Effectively accomplishes assigned tasks. I 6 - 23 0 - 5

Determining Categorical Scores – Step 2
Step 2: Use the factor descriptors / discriminators to determine a categorical score Remember that factor descriptors are written at the top of the broadband, so the logic is that you would: Choose High if the employee consistently meets all of the factor descriptors during the appraisal cycle Choose Medium if the employee consistently meets most of the factor descriptors during the appraisal cycle with minimal guidance Choose Low if the employee consistently meets portions of the factor descriptors during the appraisal cycle, or needs greater than expected assistance in meeting them Note: This is NOT the only possible criteria for rating...use this as a starting point, but apply logic to your thought process and judgment in recommending categorical scores. Logic not rule

Contribution and Compensation Determining Categorical Scores
NH Contribution Matrix Factors Job Achievement and/or Innovation Communication Teamwork Mission Support Very High High Med Low Level IV Level III High (79 – 83) 3H Med (67 – 78) 3M Low (61 – 66) Level II M/H M/L Step 2 So Joe has a good year and it’s rating time…Joe has submitted his self assessment describing his accomplishments under each factor. His supervisor first determines to what degree he has met or exceeded a descriptor and assigns a categorical rating for each factor.

Determining Numerical Scores
Steps 3-4 Use discriminators and knowledge of the employee’s contributions to rank order the results Use rank order and knowledge of the employee’s contributions to determine numerical scores NH Career Path Job Achievement and/or Innovation Factor 3 High (3H) 79-83 John, Dan Susan Bruce, Rick James Rose, Joe 83 82 81 80 79 Slide builds with talking points: First bullet, then Category, then people and their categorical matrix, then numerical range, and finally numerical matrix.

Contribution and Compensation Determining Numeric Scores
NH Contribution Matrix Factors Job Achievement and/or Innovation Communication Teamwork Mission Support Very High High Med Low Level IV Level III High (79 – 83) 3H (79) Med (67 – 78) 3M (76) 3M (77) Low (61 – 66) Level II M/H M/L Step 5 The pay pool then follows that with a second level of distinction in assigning a point value within the high/medium/low category selected, based on factor discriminators. As a final sanity check, you may want to compare these preliminary numerical scores with the employee’s Expected OCS to confirm that your assessed scores are consistent with the employee’s original expected level of contribution at the beginning of the appraisal cycle.

Recommended Overall Contribution Score Numerical Score of Each Factor: Job Achievement and/or Innovation – 79 Communication and/or Teamwork – 76 Mission Support – 77 232 Step 6 These factor scores will ultimately be approved by the pay pool manager and averaged to create the Overall Contribution Score (OCS). So Joe’s factor scores become an overall scored of 78….remember, his expected score is 75. 232 / 3 = ~77 Overall Contribution Score

Contribution and Compensation Quality of Performance
CCAS now includes assessment of the quality of performance an employee demonstrates in achieving his/her expected contribution results during an appraisal cycle Complies with title 10, U.S.C. §1597(f), Reduction in Force (RIF) rules for DoD Quality of Performance rating assigned to each factor in addition to contribution factor scores Average of three performance factor ratings translates to the annual rating of record for employee development, selection, and RIF 10 U.S.C. 1597(f) requires the determination of which DoD employees shall be separated from employment in a reduction in force to be made primarily on the basis of performance. The performance level score assigned to each contribution factor should reflect an employee’s level of performance characteristically demonstrated throughout the appraisal cycle when compared to the CCAS factor descriptors and discriminators, expected contribution criteria, an employee’s contribution plan, and the impact of the quality of the contributions on the organization. trans A Participating Organization may supplement the generic criteria with additional standards that identify milestones, production, due dates, or other measurable aspects of success contributing to the accomplishment of the goals and objectives necessary to meet an organization’s mission and are achievable during the appraisal cycle. Our organizational policy regarding this is XXX AcqDemo Operating Guide, Chapter 6, Section 6.9 6.9 Performance Appraisal Quality Level (PAQL) Criteria Title 10 U.S.C. §1597(f) requires the determination of which DoD employees shall be separated from employment in a reduction in force to be made primarily on the basis of performance. In order to comply with 10 U.S.C. §1597(f), CCAS has been modified to embrace the quality of performance an employee demonstrates in achieving his/her expected contribution results through an assessment of performance under each of the three contribution factors. Three performance appraisal quality levels (PAQLs) (pronounced as payquil) are provided as shown in Table 5 [on page 209 in the Ops Guide] together with generic quality criteria. A Participating Organization may supplement the PAQL criteria (see Table 5) in local business rules with additional standards that identify milestones, production, due dates, or other measurable aspects of success contributing to the accomplishment of the goals and objectives necessary to meet an organization’s mission and are achievable during the appraisal cycle. The performance appraisal quality level to be assigned to each contribution factor should reflect an employee’s level of performance during the appraisal cycle as compared to the CCAS factor expected contribution criteria, descriptors and discriminators, an employee’s contribution plan, and the impact of the quality of the contributions on the organization. The three perfromance appraisal levels are averaged to calculate the annual rating of record. The resulting quotient will be rounded to the nearest tenth of a decimal point. If the hundredths and thousandths places of the decimal reflect forty-nine or less, they are dropped and the tenths place does not change. If the hundredths and thousandths places of the decimal is fifty or more, they are dropped and the tenths place is increased by “0.1”. The final average will then reflect the employee’s overall performance rating of record during the appraisal cycle based on the rating criteria outlined in Table 6, and Table 7 has examples of the PAQLs to a final rating of record.

Contribution & Compensation
Quality of Performance — Level Definitions As the rating official considers such items as the employee’s self-assessment, customers’ feedback, and personal observations in preparation for assigning preliminary CCAS scores, he/she will also assess the quality of the employee’s performance in achieving his/her contribution results under each of the three contribution factors. A preliminary performance appraisal level of either Level 5 – Outstanding, Level 3 – Fully Successful, or Level 1 - Unacceptable from Table 3 will be assigned by the rating official to each of the three contribution factors. The three performance appraisal levels are averaged to calculate the annual rating of record. The resulting quotient will be rounded to the nearest tenth of a decimal point. ~ Additional Component / Agency policy may apply ~

Contribution & Compensation
Quality of Performance – Level Values Quality of performance appraisal levels are averaged and the average translates to the annual rating of record using the Rating Criteria, below: During the pay pool panel process, panel members will review the preliminary performance appraisal level justifications for the contribution factors and rating of record for all pay pool members for consistency and equity of application within the pay pool population before final approval. The average raw score of the three appraisal levels and the approved annual rating of record will be recorded in the Defense Civilian Personnel Data System. The annual rating of record will be recorded as a Level 5 - Outstanding, Level 3 - Fully Successful, or Level 1 - Unacceptable.

Activity: Assessing Employee Contributions
In small groups, review the background information on the following pages. As a group, collectively determine the preliminary categorical scores for each of the employees for one factor. Present your group’s results to the rest of the class. Instructor: Using the factor Job Achievement and/or Innovation for this activity. Approximately 30 min activity. Answers will vary but this activity should prompt discussions as to the differences between participant categorical ratings. Have them discuss their views.

Special Situations Pay Retention
EOCS will be set at top of the broadband equivalent regardless of retained pay rate Retained rate employees are ineligible for a Contribution Rating Increase (CRI), but may earn a roll over bonus or Contribution Award (CA) in a similar manner as employees at the maximum pay of assigned broadband level based on rated OCS Retained rate employees may receive 50% of any GPI awarded

Special Situations (Con’t.)
Presumptive Ratings Used when employee cannot be evaluated due to circumstances that take the individual away from their normal duties or duty station Long-term full-time training Active military duty Extended sick leave Qualified family and medical leave Full time union representation Leave without pay, etc. Pay Pool Data Maintainers will reflect appropriate coding in the CCAS spreadsheet, which will be reflected in the employee’s approved Part I – CCAS Appraisal Form Refer to AcqDemo Ops Guide Chapter 6, section 6.17 for greater detail regarding presumptive rating recommendations.

Presumptive Ratings Rating official selects from 1 of 5 presumptive status options Presumptive Status 1—New AcqDemo hires with less than 90 calendar days immediately preceding September 30th who are ineligible for a CCAS rating Presumptive Status 2—Renders an OCS equal to an EOCS and PAQL of Level 3–Fully Successful. Presumes employee is contributing commensurate with the current basic pay Presumptive Status 3—Re-certifies employee’s last assessed OCS if greater than current EOCS AND last PAQL was higher than expected Refer to AcqDemo Ops Guide Chapter 6, section 6.17 for greater detail regarding presumptive rating recommendations.

Presumptive Ratings (Cont.) Rating official selects from 1 of 5 presumptive status options Presumptive Status 4—Applied to employees with prolonged absence due to work-related injury or full time union representation duties AND who do not have an official rating of record within the 4-year period preceding the “cut-off date” of a RIF. Renders an OCS equal to their EOCS and PAQL of Level 3–Fully Successful. Presumptive Status 5—Applied to employees absent for military service Meets 90-day minimum working under an approved contribution plan – assessed under normal CCAS assessment process Does not meet 90-day minimum AND no previous rating of record – assigned OCS equivalent to EOCS and “most frequently given” rating of record in competitive area Does not meet 90-day minimum AND has a previous rating of record – receives OCS equivalent to EOCS and PAQL consistent with previous rating of record Refer to AcqDemo Ops Guide Chapter 6, section 6.17 for greater detail regarding presumptive rating recommendations.

New Hires Employees with less than 90 consecutive calendar days as of 30 September under CCAS will be considered in parity with their current pay, and will not be rated that year but will receive the full amount of any General Pay Increase (GPI). Part I of the CCAS Appraisal Form will document that the employee is receiving a “Presumptive – Status 1” rating due to lack of time in CCAS.

Rating Official Change or Employee Movement When a Rating Official changes positions or an employee changes positions, a tool to assist organizations in making appraisal and compensation decisions has been created. It is called the “AcqDemo Rating Official Change and Employee Movement Matrix.” It can be found as an Appendix in your Participant Guide, as well as online at:

Part-time Employees Are treated as full-time equivalents. Appraisals are based on full-time equivalent contributions. Pay adjustments are based on the full-time annual rate of basic pay. Pay pool managers may prorate CA amounts. Calculate hourly part-time rate to reach the full-time equivalent when determining Expected OCS.

Post-Cycle Promotion If an employee is promoted to a higher broadband after the end of the appraisal period but before the payout… Expected OCS on 30 September of the previous cycle continues to be used in determining the delta OCS Contribution Rating Increase (CRI) is calculated If the calculated CRI, plus the GPI, plus the previous base pay is higher than the promotion pay adjusted by GPI, then the employee will get the CCAS calculated pay as their new pay effective on payout date If the adjusted promotion pay is higher than the CCAS calculated pay, then the adjusted promotion pay will remain Need to draw this one out on the board. It will be easier to visualize an example than try to understand this text.

Rewarding Employee Contributions
Pay Pool Funding Payout Calculations CCAS Reward Payout Criteria Selecting Target Pay This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module.

Pay Pool Funding Pay Pool Funding Contribution Rating Increase (CRI)
Intended to be consistent with funds historically spent in GS on within-grade increases, quality-step increases and promotions between grades that are now banded Minimum of 2% of activity’s total base pay budget of employees on board as of 30 September Contribution Awards (CA) Intended to be consistent with funds historically spent in GS on performance awards Minimum of 1% of activity’s total adjusted base pay Will not exceed 90% of organization’s total awards budget General Pay Increase (GPI) Accounts for the cost of labor and percentage increase for the GS pay table

CCAS Reward Payout Criteria
Pay Adjustment Guidelines Three forms of compensation available depending on the category into which employee falls (see chart below) General Pay Increase may be reduced or denied Locality Pay is not at risk Overcompensated (Above the rails) BASIC PAY Normal Pay Range (Within the rails) Undercompensated (Below the rails) OVERALL CONTRIBUTION SCORE Payout Eligibility Compensation Category General Pay Increase Contribution Rating Increase Contribution Award Locality Pay Overcompensated Can be given in full, reduced or denied No Yes Appropriately Compensated Yes – up to 6% Undercompensated Yes – up to 20% 60

Payout Calculations Determine who is in the pay pool as of the end of the rating period on 30 September. The people on board 30 September, determine the salaries to be applied to pay pool funds. Salaries are added up for base pay and adjusted base pay. Let’s see what happens next. Total the Basic Pay column for use in CRI calculations. Total the Adjusted Pay column for use in CA calculations. Note: Total Adjusted Pay example, above, reflects current RUS locality rate; total adjusted pay will vary by locality. 61

Payout Calculations (Con’t.)
Calculate pay pool dollars allocated for pay increases (CRI) and awards (CA). The minimum funding level for CRI is 2.0% of the total basic pay and CA is 1.0% of total adjusted pay. CRI = $9,103 Total Basic Pay * CRI Funding Level = CRI Pool $455,147 X 2.0% = $9,103 CA = $4,667 Total Adjusted Pay * CA Funding Level = CA Pool $518,591 X 90% of 1.0% = $4,667

Joe’s ECR and Expected OCS
$130,000 $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 Basic Pay $82,750 Normal Pay Range or Expected Contribution Range (ECR) (8% +/- of SPL) (approx. +/- 4 OCS points) Standard Pay Line So this is the famous “rails” graph of AcqDemo. This is what distributes that GS-1 to GS-15 salary range across the total range of points available. That creates what we call the Standard Pay Line (red line). The design provides for a tolerance of plus/minus 8% salary from the SPL. This creates what we call the Normal Pay Range (NPR) and Expected Contribution Range (ECR). So if Joe makes $80K, he will plot an expected score of 75 for that salary level. Overall Contribution Score (OCS) 100 75 Expected OCS Basic Pay of $80,735 equates to Expected OCS of 75; Expected Contribution Range includes approx. +/- 4 OCS points

Joe’s Final OCS Sample of Rated Level of Contribution
$130,000 $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 Basic Pay Target Pay $86,580 Delta Pay $82,750 75 Expected OCS Delta OCS Standard Pay Line So the pay pool has approved Joe’s score of 78. What is the effect of that? If we reverse the earlier process and start with the 78 score along the scoring axis, follow it up to the SPL and back over to the salary axis, we see that Joe has earned a target salary of $86,237, which creates a delta in his OCS of +3 points and a $5,502 delta salary. Now, it would be great if everyone could get all of what they earn from a rating but as you know, there is limited funding in the pay pools. In addition, the more delta OCS points to be compensated, the lower the percentage of payout there will be for each of the pay pool employees. This slide uses the Standard Pay Line as the CRI pay decision or perspective. Be aware that this is a component decision. Overall Contribution Score (OCS) 100 77 Rated OCS Basic Pay for Rated OCS of 77 = $86,580 vs. Expected OCS of 75 = $82,750 (creates a Delta OCS of 2 points and Delta Pay of $3,830)

* * * Setting Target Pay Setting Target Pay for CRI and CA Upper Rail
OCS SPL *0.92 Lower Rail *1.08 Upper Rail Setting Target Pay for CRI and CA Upper Rail * Standard Pay Line Lower Rail * This is merely an example…this slide represents how rail choices can be different for CRI and CA *

Target Pay = Lower Rail Only three employees receive CRI pay adjustment - None Between the Rails . . Lower Rail . . . . . .

Target Pay = Standard Pay Line
Now five receive CRI pay adjustment - Including two Between the Rails Standard Pay Line . . . . . . Being exactly on the rail may result in very small CRI or even no CRI . .

Target Pay = Upper Rail Now seven receive CRI pay adjustment - Including all four in Between the Rails Upper Rail . . . . . . . .

Calculate total positive Delta Pay.
Payout Calculations Enter approved OCS and Target Salaries. Determine the Delta OCS and Delta Salaries. -$1,395 -$9,337 X Expected OCS Approved Delta Basic Pay Target Contributor, Joe 75 77 2 -6 $82,750 $86,580 $3,830 Sayers, Rose 74 68 $81,756 $72,419 Collins, James Blaine, Rick 76 $84,879 $3,123 67 69 $70,996 $73,871 $2,875 Munroe, Cora 64 4 $66,893 $5,526 Wayne, Bruce 66 -1 $69,601 X The pay pool software then sums the delta salaries created from comparing current and target salaries. Our example uses the SPL as the pay line. Of special note then in this example, Bruce Wayne and Rose Sayers who had negative delta OCS’s (even though Bruce was still within his Expected Contribution Range) will not receive a payout. Since they will not actually be reduced in salary as a direct result of their rating, this value is ignored and only positive delta salaries are added to create the total positive delta salary. Total Positive Delta Salary = $15,354 Calculate total positive Delta Pay.

Payout Calculations (Cont’d.)
Calculate percent of Delta Pay to be given. Available Dollars for CRI ÷ Total Positive Delta = Percent for CRI Payout CRI Pool $9,103 Total Positive Delta Pay of $15,354 $9,103 ÷ $15,354 = % of Positive Delta Pay for CRI Available Dollars for CA ÷ Total Positive Delta = Percent for CA Payout CA Pool $4,667 Total Positive Delta Pay of $15,354 $4,667 ÷ $15,354 = % of Positive Delta Pay for CA 70

Joe’s Payout Calculations
Calculate approved CRI and CA Expected OCS Approved Delta Basic Pay Target Contributor, Joe 75 77 2 $82,750 $86,580 $3,830 Delta Pay * Percent of Delta Pay for CRI = Contribution Rating Increase $3, X % = $2,271 Delta Pay * Percent of Delta Pay for CA = Contribution Award $3, X % = $1,164 71

Overall Compensation from the Pay Pool
Expected OCS Approved OCS Delta OCS Basic Target Delta Computed CRI Computed CA Pay Contributor, Joe 75 77 2 $82,750 $86,580 $3,830 $2,271 $1,164 Sayers, Rose 74 68 -6 $81,756 $72,419 ($9,337) $0 Collins, James 76 $84,879 $3,123 $1,851 $949 Blaine, Rick 67 69 $70,996 $73,871 $2,875 $1,705 $874 Wayne, Bruce 66 -1 $69,601 ($1,395) Munroe, Cora 64 4 $66,893 $5,526 $3,276 $1,680 $4,622 59.29% 30.40% $9,103 $4,667 Step 10 All the CRI and CA Pool dollars are distributed!!! 72

Feedback on Contributions
End-of-Cycle Discussion CCAS Appraisal Form, Part 1 Inadequate Contribution Grievance Process Activity: Communicating Appraisal Results This is an overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module. 73

End-of-Cycle Discussion
End-of-Cycle discussion will include: Final Annual Appraisal, factor scores and Overall Contribution Score (OCS) Quality of Performance Scores Contribution Rating Increase (CRI) Contribution Award (CA) Areas of success and opportunities for greater contribution Areas for improvement Finally, at the end of the cycle as the payout is issued, these areas must be discussed…we’ll examine what they are and how they are developed in the next slides…

End-of-Cycle Discussion Tips
Be confident in message being delivered Focus on evidence of contributions Stress relationship between mission, contributions, and appraisal results Understand value for contributions across the pay pool and how each employee’s contributions compare to others Document the results of the discussion, highlighting the action plan for next steps to be taken

CCAS Results – Part I Form
Step 11 Identifying info Signatures Appraisal Details

CCAS Results – Part I Form (Cont.)
Compensation Detail Remarks

Increased Contribution Opportunities
Regardless of results, lead a discussion on how the employee can continue to increase their opportunities to contribute during the next cycle. Are there opportunities for greater contribution in current role? What inhibits greater contribution? YES NO Are opportunities for greater contribution available within org? Full chart is shown in Participant Guide ~ See Participant Guide for full chart ~

Inadequate Contribution
Goal of System: Appropriate compensation for contribution to mission effectiveness Inadequate contribution could result in: Reassignment Reduction in Pay Removal from Federal Service Contribution Improvement Plans (CIP’s) should be considered in the case of employees whose contributions to mission accomplishment are inadequate A CIP is mandatory if the employee’s OCS is above the upper rail of the Normal Pay Region (NPR) and/or the quality of performance is unacceptable The demonstration project aims to go beyond a performance-based rating system, to link rewards to the levels of contribution. Therefore, the system also accounts for those whose contributions are judged to be less than adequate. This section applies to reduction in pay or removal of demonstration project employees based on inadequate contribution. As we’ve seen, contribution is measured against six critical factors, each with levels of increasing contribution corresponding to the three career paths. Inadequate contribution in any one factor at any time during the appraisal period is considered grounds for reassigning employees, reducing their pay or removing them from Federal Service. Inadequate contribution can also result when the OCS falls in the over-compensated region. This authority is similar to that for identifying poor performers under current Civil Service Rules. Supervisors should consult with their HR specialist when considering any action described in this section.

Inadequate Contribution (Con’t.)
Inadequate Contribution is defined as: When the overall contribution score places the employee in the overcompensated region (above the rail) An unacceptable performance appraisal level on at least one of the three contribution appraisal factors Contributions in one or more of the Quality of Performance levels falls into the Unacceptable range In situation 2, the employee’s OCS has placed them above the upper rail of the Expected Contribution Range in category “A.” In these cases, the supervisor can make a judgment call on whether or not a CIP is necessary. A supervisor can decide to document the decision not to do a CIP and inform the employee and higher management or the supervisor can determine that CIP action is necessary.

Inadequate Contribution (Con’t.)
Conclusion of Annual CCAS Process OR Any Time During CCAS Rating Period — Any One or More Factors — OCS less than ECR AND PAQL Level 1 - Unacceptable Performance Appraisal Quality Level (PAQL) Rating of Record Level 1 - Unacceptable OCS Less than Expected Contribution Range (ECR) (Plots in Overcompensated Region) Here is a graphic representation of what was described on the previous slide - what constitutes inadequate contribution. When an employee’s contribution score causes the employee’s base pay to plot in the overcompensated region (above the upper rail of the Normal Pay Region) AND/OR the quality of performance is considered at an Unacceptable, Level 1, rating of record in any one factor, the employee is considered to be contributing inadequately.

Contribution Improvement Plans
Establishing a Contribution Improvement Plan: Supervisor prepares Contribution Improvement Plan Supervisors are advised to contact their HR Specialist for assistance Supervisor notifies employee in writing CIP must contain: Specific areas in which the employee is inadequately contributing Standards for adequate contribution Actions required of the employee Time in which contribution improvement must be accomplished Assistance from the service or agency Consequences of failure to improve Employee must sustain adequate contribution for two years There are many component unique requirements of preparing improvement actions so we advise all supervisors to work with their HR specialist for assistance on these matters, but a CIP must contain these items….

CCAS Grievance Process
Employees May Grieve: OCS Rating Quality of Performance Rating Supervisor Assessment Process: Through a Collective Bargaining Agreement; or Administrative Grievance Procedure (5 CFR 771) as supplemented by local procedures Employee submits grievance to Supervisor Supervisor provides recommendation to pay pool panel Pay pool may accept recommendation or reach independent decision Pay pool decision is final unless employee requires reconsideration by next higher official to pay pool manager Next higher official renders final decision Lastly, employees may grieve their OCS rating either through the provisions of their local bargaining agreement or the administrative grievance process as supplemented by any local procedures.

Activity: Communicating Appraisal Results
Review the background scenarios on the following page Prepare the key talking points for the appraisal results meeting for the scenario assigned to you Discuss your talking points with the class May do individually or in small groups. This is a 15 minute activity.

CAS2Net This is overview slide provides the topics for the upcoming module. 85

CAS2Net Overview An Oracle software application that is accessed via the internet to capture CCAS-related data Master database used by Pay Pool Administrators to maintain pay pool personnel data Modules for contribution planning, mid-point review, additional feedback, self-assessments, and annual appraisals Common Access Card (CAC) enabled Check local policy to determine your specific uses of CAS2Net CAS2Net = Contribution-based Compensation and Appraisal System Software for the Internet (CCAASS…) Technically, the 2 was meant to be shown as a superscript, but it became easier to just show it as regular type.

CAS2Net Logging in to CAS2Net
Access the CAS2Net site by going to the following URL: For initial login, CAS2Net redirects to the ALTESS sign-on site The Usage Policy screen is shown Click “I Agree” button to continue

Click the “CAC Login” button to sign-in

Select one of your installed CAC digital certificates and click the OK button If prompted, enter your CAC PIN

You will be prompted to type in your in order to receive future correspondence from the AcqDemo Program Office

CAS2Net successfully logs the user in and displays the Welcome Screen The Navigation Bar is on the left and the modules listed depend on user role

Contribution Planning Screenshot 1
Once an Employee completes their individual objectives Check the Employee Narrative Complete Box Click Save and Exit

Contribution Planning Screenshot 2

Mid-Point Self-Assessment Screenshot

Mid-Point Review Screenshot 1

Mid-Point Review Screenshot 2

Additional Feedback Screenshot 1

Additional Feedback Screenshot 2

Appraisal Self-Assessment Screenshot
Click Each tab to type in self- assessment Center Title is a hot link for descriptors and discriminators Must Click Employee Narrative Complete and Save

Annual Appraisal Screenshot 1

Annual Appraisal Screenshot 2

Employee Reports Screenshot

Supervisor Reports Screenshot

The Way Forward Summary Next Steps Activity: CCAS Plan of Action 104

Course Summary Understand your role in implementing your organization’s compensation strategy Set clear expectations at the beginning of the appraisal cycle Monitor contributions throughout the appraisal cycle Write clear, concise impact statements in appraisals rather than long narratives Rate employees using factors descriptors and discriminators

Next Events Annual Appraisal Self-Assessment Annual Appraisal
Categorical Scoring Numerical Scoring Performance Appraisal Quality Levels Pay Pool reviews of preliminary scores and compensation Results / Meeting(s) Aggregate results shared with workforce per component/local policy

Activity: CCAS Plan of Action
Using the worksheet in your Participant Guide: List the open items identified in today’s class, along with your plan of action and anticipated milestone dates associated with each item. Item Plan of Action Milestone Date(s)

CCAS for Supervisors Questions?

Please complete the Class Evaluation Thank you for attending!
CCAS for Supervisors Please complete the Class Evaluation Thank you for attending!

Presented by AcqDemo Program Office

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Presented by AcqDemo Program Office"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Presented by AcqDemo Program Office

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Presented by AcqDemo Program Office"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback