MS 626: Peace Corps Performance Appraisal System


Date: 9/25/91
Office: M/PM
Supersedes: MS 626, 4/3/84


Table of Contents
Attachments


Table of Contents

1.0

Purpose

2.0

Excluded From Coverage

3.0

References

4.0

Purpose of the Performance Appraisal System

5.0

Policy

6.0

Definitions

 

6.1

Appraisal

 

6.2

Appraisal Period

 

6.3

Critical Element

 

6.4

Days

 

6.5

Office Directors

 

6.6

Performance

 

6.7

Performance Appraisal

 

6.8

Performance Appraisal System

 

6.9

Performance Plans

 

6.10

Performance Standards

 

6.11

Progress Review

 

6.12

Rating Official

 

6.13

Reviewing Official

 

6.14

Supervisor

 

6.15

Unacceptable Performance

7.0

Appraisal Period

8.0

Responsibilities

 

8.1

Director of Personnel Management

 

8.2

Rating Official

 

8.3

Employee

 

8.4

Reviewing Official

9.0

Techniques and Approaches for Developing Critical Elements and Performance Standards

 

9.1

Sources

 

9.2

Number of Critical Elements

 

9.3

Required Critical Element for Supervisors

10.0

The Appraisal Process

 

10.1

Performance Planning

 

10.2

Progress Review

 

10.3

Appraisal

 

 

10.3.1

Appraising Performance While on Detail

11.0

Performance Rating

 

11.1

Rating Performance Elements

 

 

11.1.1

Outstanding

 

 

11.1.2

Excellent

 

 

11.1.3

Satisfactory

 

 

11.1.4

Unsatisfactory

 

11.2

Element Rating Point Values

 

11.3

Summary Rating

12.0

Warning Prior to Issuing an Unsatisfactory Rating

 

12.1

General

 

12.2

Procedure

 

12.3

Following the Warning

 

12.4

Corrective Action Following Unsatisfactory Performance

13.0

Reduction in Grade or Removal Based on Unacceptable Performance

 

13.1

Procedure

 

13.2

Appeals

14.0

Evaluation of Effectiveness of the System

15.0

Records Maintenance

16.0

Orientation for Supervisors and Employees

17.0

Relationship of Performance Appraisal to the Employee Counseling Program

 

17.1

Suggested Steps When a Performance Deficiency is Identified

18.0

Effective Date

 

Attachments


IN PROGRESS OF OBTAINING

Attachment A

Employee Performance Planning And Appraisal Form: The Appraisal Process.

Form

PC-1590 (part A)

Form

PC-1590 (part B)

Form

PC-1590 (part C)



1.0 Purpose

This Manual Section establishes Peace Corps' Performance Appraisal System for all permanent employees who are not excluded by Paragraph 2.

2.0 Excluded From Coverage

3.0 References

4.0 Purpose of the Performance Appraisal System

Peace Corps' Performance Appraisal System is designed to (1) provide for periodic appraisals of job performance; (2) encourage employee participation in establishing performance standards; and (3) use the results of performance appraisals as a basis for training, rewarding, reassigning, promoting, demoting, retaining and removing employees, where appropriate.

5.0 Policy

The performance appraisal system shall, to the maximum extent possible, permit the accurate and timely evaluation of job performance on the basis of objective criteria (which may include courtesy to the public) related to the job of an employee or position. In addition, it is the policy of the Peace Corps to use the performance appraisal system to enhance effective communications between the supervisor and the employee and to provide an opportunity for employees to develop to their maximum potential.

6.0 Definitions

6.1 Appraisal

The comparison of an employee's performance of duties and responsibilities to performance standards.

6.2 Appraisal Period

The period of time an employee's performance will be appraised.

6.3 Critical Element

A component of an employee's job in which below- standard performance requires remedial action and may be the basis for removing or reducing the grade level of that employee. Such action may be taken without regard to performance on other components of the job.

6.4 Days

Days as used in this manual section mean calendar days.

6.5 Office Directors

The Peace Corps Director, Deputy Director, Associate Directors, the General Counsel and heads of staff offices.

6.6 Performance

An employee's accomplishment of assigned duties and responsibilities.

6.7 Performance Appraisal

The continuous process by which an employee is informed of (1) the critical and non-critical elements of his or her position; (2) the performance standards established with respect to those elements; (3) how the employee's performance is viewed by the supervisor in relation to those standards; and (4) the means for improving performance where appropriate.

6.8 Performance Appraisal System

A system that establishes performance standards; identifies critical elements; communicates standards and critical elements to employees; and establishes performance appraisal methods and procedures based on previously established standards and critical elements, and appropriate use of appraisal results in making personnel decisions.

6.9 Performance Plans

Documents developed jointly by the supervisor and employee before the appraisal period that define the critical and non- critical elements against which an employee's performance will be appraised, and establish performance standards for those elements.

6.10 Performance Standards

Expressed measure of level of achievement.

6.11 Progress Review

The discussion of the employee's progress in relation to meeting the performance standards and goals.

6.12 Rating Official

The individual who is responsible for informing the employee of the performance elements (both critical and non-critical) of the position, establishing performance standards for those elements, appraising performance and assigning the recommended performance rating (after conferring with employee).

6.13 Reviewing Official

The immediate supervisor of the rating official, except for certain employees in the Inspector General's Office who are not subject to review by the Peace Corps Director.

6.14 Supervisor

An individual employed by the agency who has authority to hire, direct, assign, promote, reward, transfer, furlough, layoff, recall, suspend, discipline, or remove an employee; to adjust grievances, or to recommend such actions, if the exercise of the authority is not merely routine or clerical in nature but requires the consistent exercise of independent judgment. If an individual possesses the authority to perform just one of the functions above, regardless of the number and type of employees supervised, that person is a supervisor.

6.15 Unacceptable Performance

Performance of an employee who fails to meet established performance standards in one or more critical elements of the employee's position.

7.0 Appraisal Period

The appraisal period is one year, beginning February 1 of each year and ending January 31 of the following year. The first appraisal period under this revised system shall begin 60 days after the issuance of this Manual Section in order to allow adequate time for familiarization with the system and development of performance plans.

8.0 Responsibilities

8.1 Director of Personnel Management

The Director of Personnel Management is responsible for the following:

8.2 Rating Official

A Rating Official is responsible for the following:

8.3 Employee

An employee is responsible for the following:

8.4 Reviewing Official

A Reviewing Official is responsible for the following:

9.0 Techniques and Approaches for Developing Critical Elements and Performance Standards

9.1 Sources

Critical and non-critical elements may be drawn from a number of sources, including mission and function statements, position descriptions, planning documents, operating budget justifications and affirmative action plans. Managerial and supervisory duties such as recommending or making personnel decisions, developing and appraising subordinates and fulfilling equal opportunity and affirmative action responsibilities must be addressed, where appropriate.

Critical elements include only those aspects controlled by the employee and must be consistent with the duties and responsibilities covered in the employee's position description. Critical elements must cover individual aspects of a non-supervisory employee's position and both individual and organizational aspects of an employee's position if that employee supervises a work unit. Examples of critical elements that reflect individual performance include those related to administrative responsibilities such as human resources management, work management, financial management and communication. Examples of critical elements that reflect organizational performance include program implementation and program planning.

Performance standards may be identified from the same sources used to develop critical elements. In addition, the supervisor's knowledge of program emphasis and resource availability should be considered. Standards should define performance in terms of product (what is to be accomplished) and process (how it is to be accomplished). Standards should be as specific and measurable as possible and, where applicable, expressed in terms of quality, quantity and timeliness.

Performance standards should be realistic in terms of what is possible to achieve, and yet challenging enough to stimulate growth. They should take into account factors such as: available resources, the environment in which the program operates, and any external factors affecting organizational or individual capacity to perform. Since these factors may change from year to year or even within the same year, performance standards should never be viewed as absolutes. They should be reviewed periodically to assess their validity under existing circumstances and revised promptly when necessary.

9.2 Number of Critical Elements

The number of critical elements contained in a performance plan will vary from position to position and may change yearly or even within a given year for a specific position. Although most aspects of a position are important, not all are critical. Therefore, if the number of critical elements exceeds eight or nine, the rating official and the employee should discuss the feasibility or grouping elements into broader categories. Common sense should be the guiding principle in making the determination.

9.3 Required Critical Element for Supervisors

A required critical element for all supervisors will be the completion of performance appraisals by required dates.

10.0 The Appraisal Process

The appraisal process involves three distinct stages: performance planning, progress review and appraisal. This process takes place based on a cycle starting February 1 and ending the following January 31.

10.1 Performance Planning

At least four weeks before the start of the appraisal period, rating officials and employees, or groups of employees, when practical, shall begin developing written performance plans for the coming appraisal period. These plans must include the following:

Upon request, rating officials will meet with any employee or group of employees affected by a particular element or standard to discuss the rating official's proposals. None of the discussions will constitute negotiations over the substance of the performance standards. The rating officials shall make the Agency decision on this matter, consistent with the criteria established in the law, regulations, contract and this Manual Section. Information used by a rating official in proposing any standard will be available to all participants prior to the discussion.

If the rating official and the employee disagree over the content of any performance plan items, they should attempt to resolve the disagreements informally with the assistance of the reviewing official. If not resolved at this level, the higher reviewing official shall make the final decision.

The employee shall sign the performance plan to indicate that the plan has been discussed. The employee's signature on the plan does not indicate agreement with the plan. All performance plans must be completed and signed by all parties before the appraisal period begins.

For an employee entering a position after the start of the appraisal period, a performance plan must be developed within two (2) weeks of the date the employee entered the position. Such performance plans will cover the period of time remaining until the end of the appraisal period or 120 days, whichever is greater.

During the development and review, performance plans should be considered in terms of the following factors:

Have appropriate critical elements been

10.2 Progress Review

At a minimum, the rating official must conduct at least one progress review with each employee approximately halfway through the appraisal period. An employee may request additional progress reviews as necessary. The progress review must include discussion of the following:

There must be a record of the progress review that will consist of the rating official's and the employee's signatures and dates affixed to the performance plan in the appropriate place. Progress reviews must also be scheduled and conducted for employees who enter positions after the start of the appraisal period and must be completed near the midpoint of the shortened appraisal period.

10.3 Appraisal

Appraisals shall be completed at the end of the appraisal period for all employees who have occupied their positions for 120 days or more during the appraisal period, except:

The rating official shall initiate the appraisal before the end of the appraisal period by providing advance notice to the employee of the date and time for an appraisal meeting. The employee shall be given the option of having a pre-appraisal meeting with the rating official to:

¿ Present his or her assessment of results achieved against the standards in the performance plan;

After the pre-appraisal meeting, if any, the rating official shall prepare and discuss with the employee a draft of the performance appraisal. This appraisal must be based on an assessment of the employee's performance against the set standards in the performance plan and must include a recommended rating of one of the levels of achievement defined in paragraph 11.1. The employee will have at least one week to review and comment on the proposed rating. The rating official and the employee shall try to resolve any disagreement on the appraisal. If a disagreement still exists, the rating official shall submit the proposed appraisal and rating, along with the employee's comments, to the reviewing official who shall try to resolve the conflicting issues in the appraisal. If changes are introduced by the reviewing official, he or she will discuss the proposed changes with the rating official and the employee before making them final. The office director shall have final authority for resolving any remaining conflicts. All parties shall sign the appraisal form as evidence of discussion, but the employee's signature does not imply agreement with the rating nor does it constitute a waiver of the employee's rights.

All appraisals must be completed and submitted to the Personnel Director (M/PM) no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the appraisal period.

10.3.1 Appraising Performance While on Detail

When an employee is officially detailed to another position for a period of 120 days or longer, the employee's performance in that position must be appraised by the supervisor who has jurisdiction over the position within 30 days after the end of the detail. This appraisal will be based on pre-established critical elements and performance standards that were prepared and discussed with the employee when he or she entered the position. Appropriate revision of the original performance plan should be made so that the appraisal of the employee's performance while on detail can be given appropriate consideration in the overall appraisal.

11.0 Performance Ratings

11.1 Rating Performance Elements

Official performance ratings for each element must use the adjective (from the following list of four) that is most descriptive of the performance.

11.1.1 Outstanding

Performance on an element that meets or exceeds standards set at the beginning of the rating period for outstanding performance. Standards set at this level must show that the overall performance is expected to be of such exceptional quality that the level of performance substantially exceeds what is necessary to accomplish the work. An adjective rating at this level must be supported by a detailed explanation of how the performance met the standards set at this level and must be approved by the Director (M/PM) before the rating becomes official.

11.1.2 Excellent

Performance on an element that exceeds the standards set at the satisfactory level but less than the outstanding level. Such a rating must be justified with a description of how the performance exceeded the satisfactory standards.

11.1.3 Satisfactory

Performance on an element that meets the standards set for satisfactory performance.

11.1.4 Unsatisfactory

Performance on an element that does not meet the standards set for satisfactory performance. A rating at this level must be fully documented and must be approved by the Director (M/PM).

11.2 Element Rating Point Values

An adjective rating for each element shall carry the following numerical point values:

Outstanding 3 points
Excellent 2 points
Satisfactory 1 point
Unsatisfactory 0 point


Critical elements shall be given a weight of two; non-critical elements shall be given a weight of one.

11.3 Summary Rating

Each element rated should be assigned the appropriate number of rating points. Performance points are determined by multiplying the rating points for each element by the weight of the element. The final summary rating for the performance appraisal is determined by dividing the sum of all the performance points by the sum of all the weights.
The overall adjective rating that accompanies the final summary rating will be based on the following table, except that an unsatisfactory rating for any critical element will automatically require an overall adjective rating of unsatisfactory.
SUMMARY RATING POINTS RATING
 
  ADJECTIVE ADJECTIVE RATING  
  0-.50 Unsatisfactory  
  51-1.50 Satisfactory  
  1.51-2.50 Excellent  
  2.51-3.00 Outstanding  


An overall rating cannot be appealed. Bargaining unit employees may grieve the overall rating under the Negotiated Agreement. All other employees may grieve the overall rating under the Agency Grievance Procedure.

12.0 Warning Prior to Issuing an Unsatisfactory Rating

12.1 General

Prior to assigning an overall unsatisfactory rating, the supervisor is required to issue a 90-day warning and make a reasonable effort to help the employee during the warning period. A notice of warning must be issued in time to allow for a 90-day period to expire on or before the end of the appraisal period; otherwise, the assignment of a rating for each element and an overall rating of unsatisfactory must be deferred until the end of the 90-days.

NOTE: An employee may be removed or demoted at any time during the appraisal cycle when his or her performance becomes unacceptable. No formal overall appraisal is required (see paragraph 13).

12.2 Procedure

The warning must be made in writing and must inform the employee of the following:

Rating and reviewing officials are required to seek guidance from the Employee Relations Specialist, Office of Personnel Management, in each case where a 90-day warning is being contemplated.

12.3 Following the Warning

At the end of the 90-day warning period, if the employee's performance has not reached a satisfactory level, an unsatisfactory rating must be given and must be accompanied by a written statement that justifies the rating and compares the employee's performance with the established standards cited in the initial warning. The statement must also specify the following:

12.4 Corrective Action Following Unsatisfactory Performance

Corrective action must be taken when performance has been determined to be less than satisfactory. The corrective action may be formal or on the job training, reassignment, reduction in grade or removal from the position.

13.0 Reduction in Grade or Removal Based on Unacceptable Performance

Employees may be reduced in grade or removed from their positions at any time for unacceptable performance. Unacceptable performance is defined as failure to meet established satisfactory performance standards for any one critical element of the employee's official position. In cases where it is apparent to a supervisor that an employee is performing at an unacceptable level, the supervisor may propose to have the employee reduced in grade or removed before the end of the normal appraisal period. However, if the proposal is initiated within the last 90-days of the appraisal cycle, the procedures in MS 626, paragraph 12. must be used. In all other cases, the supervisor shall inform the employee of his or her performance deficiencies and give the employee at least sixty (60) days to demonstrate acceptable performance.

Supervisors are required by law to communicate performance standards and critical elements to employees. Good supervision includes informing and assisting employees in improving unacceptable performance. Employees should be encouraged to discuss factors that may cause unacceptable performance. Appraising performance is an ongoing process. Supervisors monitor job performance on a daily basis. At the first signs of a performance problem, supervisors should consider whether counseling would help an employee overcome the problem.

An employee must be given the opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance. Thus, the employee must be afforded a reasonable time to show whether he or she can perform acceptably before a notice of proposed demotion or removal can be issued. During this period, more intensive supervision and training may be necessary or appropriate.

13.1 Procedure

An employee whose reduction in grade or removal is proposed shall be provided with a 30 day advance written notice of the proposed action which:

Within 30 days after the expiration of the notice period, the employee shall be given a written decision concerning the proposed action. Unless proposed by the head of the Agency, the decision must be concurred on by the next higher level of supervision over the supervisor who proposed the action.

13.2 Appeals

If the proposed reduction in grade or removal is made final, competitive service employees may make a formal appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 7701. Foreign Service employees may appeal under the appropriate grievance procedure.

Employees who believe they have been subjected to any prohibited personnel practice, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2302, may initiate a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

The supervisor shall maintain the following: copies of the notice proposing to remove or reduce the employee in grade for unacceptable performance; the employee's written response or a written summary if the response was made orally; and the notice of decision with supporting justification. These shall be furnished to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) or other appropriate officials and to the affected employee upon request.

14.0 Evaluation of Effectiveness of the System

Annually the Office of Personnel Management (M/PM) will conduct an effectiveness evaluation of the performance appraisal system to determine its effectiveness and compliance with laws and regulations. These evaluations will generally be conducted in conjunction with periodic evaluations of other personnel management programs.

15.0 Records Maintenance

Summary appraisals, as well as all supporting documents, are considered part of the overall Employee Performance File system established by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (U.S. OPM). Maintenance of these records shall be consistent with the U.S. OPM's regulations of records management, implementation of the Privacy Act and any other applicable regulations and instructions.

16.0 Orientation for Supervisors and Employees

Personnel Management will provide supervisors and employees orientation on the appraisal process, particularly on the development of performance standards and critical elements and how they serve as a basis for making personnel decisions.

17.0 Relationship of Performance Appraisal to the Employee Counseling Program

The primary purposes of the performance appraisal process are to provide management with information on the employee's performance and employees with information on improving their performance. It is through the process of appraisal that supervisors can identify employee performance deficiencies at an early stage and explore the options for correcting deficiencies. One of the options considered should be the employee counseling program which is covered in MS 658 "Employee Assistance Program". Performance appraisals, in identifying unacceptable performance, serve as an important source of information in making referrals to the Agency counseling program. Counseling programs help pinpoint the causes of performance problems and, in many cases, can successfully assist employees to get help and eventually correct problems. Referrals can be made at any time. Even when an employee is formally being given the opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance, supervisors may still make a referral to the Agency counseling program as part of that opportunity. Any supervisor wishing to make such a referral should contact the Employee Relations Specialist, Office of Personnel Management.

17.1 Suggested Steps when a Performance Deficiency is Identified

The following steps suggest how the counseling program can assist when a performance deficiency is identified:

Further guidance regarding the Agency's counseling program may be found in MS 658 or by contacting Personnel Management's Employee Relations Specialist.

18.0 Effective Date

This Manual Section takes effect on the date of issuance.