DEPARTMENTAL REGULATION |
Number: 4040-430-003 |
|
|
SUBJECT Senior
Executive Service (SES) Performance Management |
DATE: December
28, 2011 |
|
|
OPI: |
||
Section Page
1 Purpose 1
2 Background 1
3 References 2
4 Special
Instructions/Cancellations 2
5 Applicability 3
6 Definitions 3
7 Policy 5
8 Responsibilities 5
9 Procedures 9
10 Rights of the Senior Executive 23
11 Linking Performance to Other Personnel Actions 23
12 Performance Management Training Requirements 24
13 Performance Appraisal System Evaluation 25
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this directive is
to set forth the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) policy on Senior Executive
Service (SES) performance appraisals.
This directive defines the policies and procedures to be used to
appraise the performance of SES employees.
2. BACKGROUND
The
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136,
dated November 24, 2003) established a new performance-based pay system for members
of the SES. SES employees were converted to a new system on January 11,
2004. Under the law, agencies with
certified performance appraisal systems were authorized to pay their employees
at the higher Senior Executive Service rates.
A
certified SES performance appraisal system is one that receives approval from
the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) with concurrence from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and:
a.
Aligns
individual performance expectations with organizational goals,
b.
Involves senior leaders to encourage
ownership of their performance appraisal system,
c.
Links all pay decisions to individual
and organizational performance,
d.
Reflects meaningful distinctions between
performance rating levels, and
e.
Provides for transparency in the process
for making all pay decisions.
3. REFERENCES
This
directive was established in accordance with the following authorities:
a.
Public Law 108-136 – National Defense
Authorization Act for FY2004;
b.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 430 – Performance Management;
c.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 451 – Awards;
d.
USDA Guide for Employee Recognition;
e.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, Part
432 – Performance Based Reduction in Grade and Removal Actions;
f.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part – 534 – Pay Under Other Systems;
g.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 752 – Adverse Actions;
h.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 293 – Employee Performance File System Records; and
i.
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 297 - Privacy Act Procedures for Personnel Records.
4. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS/CANCELLATIONS
This directive replaces Departmental
Regulation (DR) 4040-430-002, dated September 23, 2011.
5. APPLICABILITY
This
directive is applicable to all USDA SES regardless of type of appointment
(career,
non-career, or limited) or type of position (general or career reserved)
occupied,
excluding members of the USDA Office of Inspector General.
6. DEFINITIONS
a. Annual Summary Rating - An
Executive’s annual rating that has been reviewed by a Performance Review Board and
approved by the Secretary.
b. Approving
Official -
Representative of management who has responsibility for approving SES annual
summary rating, performance awards, and base salary increases. The approving official for SES employees is
the Secretary of Agriculture.
c. Base Salary - Continuing annual
salary paid to an SES employee.
d. Base
Salary Increase - Salary increase resulting from an employee’s annual
summary rating. The Secretary of
Agriculture approves base salary increases based on recommendations from a
Performance Review Board.
e. Critical
Element - Key component of an employee’s work that contributes to
organizational goals and results and is so important that unsatisfactory
performance of the element would make the employee’s overall job performance
unsatisfactory. Such elements must be
used to measure individual performance.
f.
Executive
Resources Board (ERB)
- Group comprised of USDA executives who review and provide recommendations to
the Secretary or designee on various SES policies and programs.
g.
Higher-level
Review – A
review conducted at a higher-level organizational level than the rating and
reviewing official, but not necessarily within the same organization. This
review must precede action by the Performance Review Board.
h.
Initial
Summary Rating -
Tentative rating derived by the rating official/reviewing official as a result
of appraising an SES employee’s performance elements.
i. Interim Appraisal - An appraisal of performance by
the rating official during a temporary assignment or position change lasting a
minimum of 90 days during the rating cycle.
j. Performance
Appraisal - The written or otherwise recorded appraisal of performance
compared to established performance elements and requirements.
k. Performance
Appraisal Period - Period of time in which an employee’s performance is
evaluated. The SES performance cycle
runs October 1 through September 30 annually.
l. Performance Appraisal System - A framework of
performance management policies and parameters established by a Department.
m. Performance Award - Performance based award granted to
an employee on the basis of a current rating of record. Rating based awards are granted in accordance
with the USDA Guide for Employee Recognition and other applicable policies.
n. Performance Element - Job responsibilities and goals
for which an employee’s performance is appraised.
o. Performance Management - The systematic process of
planning work and setting expectations, continually monitoring performance,
developing the capacity to perform, providing continuous performance feedback,
rewarding good performance, and addressing performance deficiencies.
p. Performance Plan - Document that describes the
individual and organizational expectations for the appraisal period and sets the
requirements for which performance will be evaluated.
q. Performance Requirement - Management approved
expression of the performance threshold, standard(s), or expectations(s) that
must be met to be appraised at a particular level of performance. A performance requirement is related to work
quality, quantity, cost-efficiency, timeliness and/or manner of
performance. May also be referred to as
performance expectation or performance standard.
r. Performance
Review Board (PRB) - Group of executives responsible for the oversight of
the performance management and compensation processes for SES employees. A PRB reviews the initial summary ratings of
SES employees and makes recommendations for official ratings, performance
awards, and base salary increases.
s. Progress Review - Communication that occurs between
the rating official and the employee in regard to the employee’s performance
progress as compared to established performance standards and goals. This review typically occurs during the
mid-point of the appraisal period. These
reviews are often referred to as mid-year reviews.
t. Rating
Official - Representative of management, generally the employee’s immediate
supervisor, who establishes the employee’s performance plan, provides the
progress review; prepares an initial summary rating; and proposes performance
awards and base salary increases based on performance.
u. Reviewing
Official - Representative of management, generally the employee’s second
level supervisor, who reviews the performance plan and initial summary rating
as well as any award and salary increase recommendations.
v. Senior
Performance Official (SPO) - Senior Agency Official who evaluates and
analyzes the PRB recommendations for ratings, performance awards and base
salary increases and submits recommendations to the Secretary. The SPO is the Assistant Secretary of
Administration.
7. POLICY
It is USDA’s policy to establish
a SES System that promotes excellence and a results-oriented performance
culture that contributes to individual and organizational effectiveness and
supports the Department’s mission and goals.
The system integrates performance, employee development and training,
pay and recognition, and links to other related personnel decisions.
8. RESPONSIBILITIES
a. The Secretary of Agriculture is
the USDA “appointing authority” for SES and he or she is responsible for the
oversight of the performance management system.
As such:
(1) Assesses overall annual USDA
organizational performance as well as performance of major program and
functional areas;
(2) Communicates organizational goals and
priorities;
(3)
Approves
summary ratings and other performance based actions after considering recommendations from the
PRB;
(4)
Nominates
employees for Presidential Rank Awards;
(5)
Approves
all monetary awards and salary increases;
(6)
Approves
all aspects of the SES performance system policy; and
(7)
Appoints the Chairperson of the Executive
Resources Board
(ERB)
and the Chairpersons of the USDA Performance Review Boards (PRB).
b. The Assistant Secretary for Administration
serves as the Senior Performance Official and as such coordinates for the
Secretary all aspects of the SES performance appraisal system to include the
implementation of performance appraisal policies and the evaluation of the
system. This role is carried out in coordination with the Secretary and
applicable Departmental Office Heads, and includes the following
responsibilities:
(1)
Manages
the appraisal process including the issuance of the Secretary’s guidance and direction on performance
management at the beginning of the
appraisal process and throughout the appraisal cycle, as required;
(2)
Coordinates
with key Departmental officials who have responsibility for strategic and performance planning to ensure
that the appraisal process links
with strategic planning initiatives as required by law;
(3) Coordinates and manages the PRB process;
(4) Ensures training is provided on
performance management issues, including training for PRB and ERB members on
their roles and responsibilities, as required;
(5) Provides support and oversight, for and
on behalf of the Secretary, regarding the appraisal process and the workings of
the PRB and ERB; and
(6) Oversees the Office of Human Resources
Management/Executive Resources/Compensation, which is assigned day-to-day
responsibility for supporting the SES performance appraisal system.
d. Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights:
(1)
Ensures that the SES performance
appraisal system reflects the Secretary’s Civil Rights Policy;
(2)
Assists and advises OHRM on the
development of procedures, elements, and requirements for rating SES with regard
to civil rights;
(3)
Provides input into the annual ratings
of executives, as applicable; and
(4)
Provides guidance to agency civil rights
directors regarding their role in the performance appraisal process.
e. Subcabinet
Officials, Agency Administrators, Staff Office Directors:
(1) Provide employees with information
concerning the SES performance appraisal system;
(2) Develop and communicate the Department,
Agency, and/or Staff Office organizational goals and priorities used in
developing individual performance plans, and assess organizational performance,
communicating results to employees, and providing formal guidance to rating and
reviewing officials on how organizational performance is considered when
deciding ratings and awards;
(3) Ensure that performance plans for
employees reflect a direct link to Department’s strategic plan and other key
plans and include appropriate performance requirements and measures as required
by this policy;
(4) Serve, when designated by the Secretary,
as PRB Chairperson and appoints full PRB membership;
(5) Ensure that annual organizational and
individual performance reviews are conducted and documented; and
(6) Ensure appropriate and adequate
performance management training is provided for executives (both supervisors
and employees) within their organization.
f. The Inspector General conducts
file check reviews of employees nominated for Presidential Rank Awards.
g. Rating Officials:
(1) Establish performance plans in accordance
with performance management policy and create a performance culture and
environment that fosters high performance;
(2) Engage employees in the process of
establishing and documenting the employees’ performance plan;
(3) Communicate performance expectations
clearly and hold employees accountable, monitoring performance during the
appraisal period and providing performance feedback to employees, developing
employees, making meaningful distinctions for assigned ratings based upon
performance, fostering and rewarding excellent performance, and taking
appropriate action to address performance not meeting expectations;
(4) Conduct at least one formal progress
review giving feedback on the quality of performance or identifying areas for
improvement during the appraisal period;
(5) Ensure that performance appraisals and
documentation for recommended awards and base salary increases are completed,
reviewed as appropriate by the PRB, and submitted to the mission area/agency
servicing human resources office by the due date prescribed by the Senior
Performance Official;
(6) Ensure that the appropriate reviewing
official has been consulted before communicating rating recommendations to an
employee;
(7) Ensure that the employee is aware that
he/she may respond to the initial rating in writing and that his/her comments
may become a part of the appraisal package submitted to the PRB.
h. Reviewing Officials:
(1) Establish a
performance culture that supports a high performing organization through
management of individual and organizational performance;
(2) Ensure that rating
officials carry out their performance management responsibilities and evaluate
rating officials to ensure accountability for performance management; and
(3)
Review and approve the
performance plans and ratings of their subordinate Senior Executives for
consistency, fairness, objectivity, and completeness, and ensure plans reflect
the overall needs and goals of the organization.
i.
Higher Level Reviewing
Official
(1)
The higher level reviewing
official reviews any written comments provided by the employee, rating and/or
reviewing official regarding the disagreement of an initial summary and renders
a suggested recommendation or analysis to the PRB. The higher level reviewing official should be
an individual who was not involved in the initial rating process and at a
higher organizational level than both the rating and reviewing officials, but
not necessarily in the same organization.
For example, Under/Assistant Secretary or Agency Head.
j. Employees:
(1) Participate in
discussions with the rating officials concerning the development of performance
elements, requirements and measures and participate in progress reviews and
performance appraisals;
(2) Ensure a clear
understanding of performance expectations and how performance relates to the
mission of the organization and request clarification from the rating official,
if necessary;
(3) Take
responsibility to improve own performance, performing at their full potential,
supporting team endeavors, and continuing professional development;
(4) Identify work
problems and cooperate to resolve them with rating officials; and
(5) Seek performance feedback from their
rating officials and, as appropriate, from internal and external customers.
k. Chairpersons of PRB’s ensure the
fair, equitable and consistent review of SES performance appraisals and
performance based actions.
l. The Secretary’s Executive Resources
Board (ERB) reviews SES performance management system policy and guidelines
and recommends approval to the Secretary.
m. The
Director, Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM):
(1) Develops and administers, on behalf of
the Assistant Secretary for Administration, the SES performance appraisal
system;
(2) Provides technical assistance and advice
on the system and processes;
(3) Monitors and evaluates the system for
compliance with applicable law, regulations, and OPM guidance; and
(4) Ensures that appropriate and adequate
training and retraining in the implementation and policy of the performance
management system occurs for executives (both supervisors and employees).
n. Agency
and Staff Office Human Resources Offices:
(1)
Provide
technical assistance and advice on the system and processes, and provide written guidance as necessary;
(2)
Manage
respective organization PRBs;
(3)
Provide
adequate training to executives (both employees and their supervisors)
as applicable; and
(4)
Assist
OHRM with the monitoring and evaluation of the system for compliance with applicable law,
regulation, and OPM guidance.
9. PROCEDURES
a.
Performance
Appraisal Period. The annual performance appraisal period is
October 1 through September 30, consistent with the official USDA performance
appraisal period.
c. Temporary Assignments and Position
Changes.
(1) Position Changes Within the Department. When a SES employee has served in two or more
positions in the Department during the appraisal period (in which the employee
served under a performance plan for the minimum appraisal period), an interim
appraisal must be prepared. This interim appraisal, along with the performance plan
upon which it was based, must be forwarded to the new supervisor for consideration
in deriving the initial summary rating due at the end of the appraisal period.
The weight given to this interim appraisal should generally be proportionate to
its share of the appraisal period. When such interim appraisals are used to
develop an initial summary rating, both the interim appraisals and the
performance plans upon which they are based must be attached to the initial
summary rating submitted to the PRB.
(2) Temporary
Assignments Within the Department. If the SES employee is detailed or otherwise
temporarily assigned within the Department and if the assignment is expected to
last the minimum appraisal period or longer, a performance plan must be established
and an interim appraisal must be prepared based on the performance during the
assignment. The weight given to this interim appraisal in preparing the initial
summary rating should generally be proportionate to its share of the appraisal
period. An interim appraisal and the
performance plan upon which it is based must be attached to the initial summary
rating submitted to the PRB.
(3) Temporary Assignments Outside the
Department. If the employee has been
detailed or otherwise temporarily assigned outside the Department, reasonable
efforts must be made to obtain appraisal information from the outside
organization which will be considered in deriving the employee's next initial
summary rating. The weight
given to this period of performance in preparing the initial summary rating
should generally be proportionate to its share of the appraisal period. A summary of this performance should be
attached to the initial summary rating submitted to the PRB.
(4) Transfers From Other Departments. If an employee transfers from another
Department into USDA during the appraisal period, any interim appraisal which
is forwarded from the losing Department (and which encompasses periods of time
included in USDA’s appraisal period), must be considered in deriving the initial
summary rating. Weight given to this performance period should be proportionate
to their share of the appraisal period. A
summary of this performance should be attached to the initial summary rating
submitted to the PRB.
(4) Measurable, Outcome-Oriented Results. Performance plans must be results-focused; therefore
requirements need to be described in terms of the
results expected. Results-focused expectations must be measurable and produce tangible
outputs, outcomes and other deliverables.
Critical elements
that merely describe activities without incorporating the desired, measureable
result of those activities or simply restate organizational goals
without including metrics for evaluating performance against those goals,
do not meet performance management law. Measurable results must
account for more than 60% of the SES performance plan and drive the
summary rating assigned. In USDA, the
Mission Results critical element
(discussed below) is the element with the greatest emphasis for measuring
results.
(5) Balanced Measures. Performance plans describe balanced
measures. This means expectations must include appropriate measures or
indicators of employee
and/or customer feedback; quality, quantity, timeliness, cost- effectiveness and
manner of performance, as applicable.
Supervisors and employees
will identify which measures are appropriate.
Credible measures
are those that are observable, measureable, realistic, achievable, and
demonstrable. Measures or indicators of
those technical, leadership, and/or managerial
competencies or behaviors that contribute to and are necessary
to distinguish greater than fully successful performance should also be included.
As
required by law, customer and employee perspective must be measured by the SES
performance appraisal system through individual SES performance plans.
Customer
perspective
measures consider the organization’s performance through the eyes of its
customers, so that the organization retains a careful focus on customer needs
and satisfaction. To achieve the best in
business performance, rating officials must incorporate reasonable customer
needs consistent with the agency’s mission and consider them as part of their
performance planning. This is done after
identifying the customers and the customers’ expectations of the agency or
employee.
Employee perspective measures focus attention on the performance of the key internal processes that drive the organization, including employee development and retention. The expectations in plans should focus on providing a healthy and safe work environment for subordinate employees, which would include how well senior employees lead and motivate their employees and address development and training needs.
(6) Accountability.
Performance plans must include expectations for performance management
of subordinates and for aligning their performance plans to organizational
goals. Performance plans must take into
account the degree of accuracy and importance placed on the appraisal of their
subordinate employees and reflect the degree to which performance expectations for
subordinates clearly align with the organization’s mission, or other program or
policy objectives. Performance plans
must also include expectations for recruiting, hiring, and retaining qualified
employees within the organization.
(10) A performance plan template has been
developed for use Department-wide to establish SES performance plans. This template has been populated with the
required performance elements and requirements and provides a table for rating
officials to establish linkage to organizational goals and to indicate the
applicable results-focused measures for the Mission Results element.
e. Establishing Performance Elements.
Performance elements are major
job responsibilities or goals for which the employee is held accountable for
during the appraisal period. SES
employees may have up to 5 performance elements in their performance plan. All elements will be critical. Refer back to Section 9d of this directive as
it provides the context for performance elements. The following are element requirements:
(1) Mandatory Elements.
All SES employees must be rated on the following three mandatory
elements:
(a) Mission Results (Critical) – This element measures an
Executive’s contribution to strategic goals and
objectives through timely and effective
planning, implementation, decision making, evaluation and accountability.
This
element is the core element for which results attributing to organizational goals are
measured. This element accounts for at least 60% of the summary rating in
an Executive’s performance plan
and is the element that drives the summary rating above the Fully
Successful level.
(b) Leadership/Management (Critical) – This element measures an Executive’s success in leading and managing his/her
organization in
the accomplishment of organizational goals through leading change; managing
resources; addressing programmatic and organizational
requirements; incorporating vision, strategic planning
and results-driven management into the full range of organization activities; and being held
accountable through customer/stakeholder
and employee feedback.
(c) Civil Rights (Critical) – This element measures an
Executive’s leadership in the implementation and
meeting of civil rights strategic
goals; enforcement of civil rights laws, rules, regulations; and holding
subordinate supervisors accountable for achieving civil rights goals and objectives
in all employment, program delivery,
and other administrative activity.
As
this element measures compliance to civil rights laws, policies,
and requirements, it is a pass/fail element.
The element will
be rated either Fully Successful or Unsatisfactory. It is recognized
that there may be specific civil rights goals or targets to include those pertaining to
mission or workforce diversity, inclusion,
outreach, etc., for which the executive is to be held accountable during the appraisal
period. These specific goals and targets
will be measured under Element 1, Mission Results.
(d) At the option of the Secretary or the
Assistant Secretary for Administration one of the optional critical elements
may be used to create a fourth mandatory element if it is needed to address a
program or function that all USDA Executives are to be held accountable for as
deemed necessary.
(2)
Critical Elements. A critical element is one that is considered
so important that unsatisfactory performance in the element would make the
employee’s overall job performance unsatisfactory. This factor should be considered when
deciding on optional performance elements.
Collectively, critical elements should cover the major duties and
responsibilities of the position.
(3)
Optional
Critical Elements. Rating
officials may add up to 2 (only 1 if 1 is being utilized under, (1)(d)
above) additional program/position specific
critical element(s), such as homeland security. It is
strongly recommended that any leader responsible for homeland security
functions have a separate homeland security element. Homeland security is defined as any functions
related to continuity of operations, continuity of government, facility or
information technology security, or those related to safety of food and
agricultural products.
f. Establishing Performance Requirements.
(1)
A performance requirement is a statement
of the expectations required by management for a performance element at a
particular level. Performance requirements
are written at the Fully Successful level. At this level, the employee produces
the expected quantity of work and meets quality and timeliness expectations for
completed work. Absence of a written
performance requirement at other levels does not preclude the assignment of a
rating at that level. Refer back to
Section 9d of this directive as it provides context for performance
requirements.
g. Employee Consultation.
Communication between
the supervisor and the employee is an essential component of effective
performance management. Establishing meaningful performance plans requires
participation of both the supervisor and the SES. Rating officials must involve
employees in the development of their performance plans. However, the final
authority for establishing performance plans rests with the rating official. The joint development of performance plans may
be done in the following ways:
(1) Employee
and supervisor discuss and develop the performance plan together;
(2) Employee
provides supervisor with a draft performance plan;
(3) Employee comments on draft performance
plan prepared by the supervisor; or
(4) Employees who
occupy similar positions prepare draft performance plan(s), with the
supervisor's approval.
h. Review
of Performance Plans.
(1)
The reviewing official should review
performance plans for alignment to organizational goals and to ensure
appropriate levels of quality and difficulty of performance expectations.
(2)
The rating and reviewing official must first
sign the performance plan. Once the
reviewing official signs the plan, it is considered approved and can be
presented to the employee for his/her signature.
i. Progress Reviews.
(1) Rating officials must monitor SES
performance during the appraisal period and provide ongoing, timely,
and honest feedback on progress in meeting
the requirements and goals in the performance plan.
(2) One formal progress review (or mid-year
review) is required for each SES employee at least once during the appraisal
period and before July 1. At a minimum,
employees must be told how well they are performing in comparison to their elements
and requirements.
(3) The rating official must provide advice
and assistance to an employee on how
to improve their performance, if necessary. If the rating official feels that
performance in one or more of the established elements is lacking, he/she should
discuss possible corrective actions as well as the ramifications of
unimproved performance. The progress review should serve as a forum for encouraging
employees whose performance is Fully Successful
or better to strive for even greater achievement and to commend
employees for excellent accomplishment.
The progress review also
provides a forum for discussion of performance weaknesses or deficiencies.
j.
Developing
Performance.
Developing
performance is an ongoing part of the performance management process. Developing performance and holding meaningful
performance-related discussions
increases an employee’s capacity to perform.
Employee development
opportunities may include classroom training, on-the-job- training, mentoring, special assignments, and
details/reassignments, participating in
professional and technical organizations, group performance meetings, process improvement teams, and self-development
activities. An Individual Development Plan
(IDP) may contain any or all of these developmental opportunities.
Supervisors will
encourage employees to seek professional and technical development
opportunities to enhance their contribution to the Department, Agency and/or
Staff Office goals.
k. Evaluating
Performance.
(1) Evaluating performance involves
assessing the performance of the SES in comparison to the communicated
performance plan. Appraisals of employee
performance must be based on both individual and organizational
performance.
(2) An annual summary rating is assigned if
the employee has
served under an established performance plan for the
minimum appraisal period of 90 days.
There is no
requirement that the rating official serve as supervisor for a minimum of 90 days. If a rating official serves for less than 90
days the following
options are available:
(a) The supervisor may give the initial
summary rating based on the SES
accomplishment report, available interim appraisals by others, and other measurable data.
(b) The next level supervisor may give the
initial summary rating.
(c) The appraisal period can be extended for
a short period of time if the extension
does not exclude the Senior Executive from the PRB process.
(3) A presumptive or assumed rating may not
be assigned. An employee must be on the job and the rating must be based on actual
accomplishments to issue
a performance rating. For example, if an
employee is on leave and has
not performed during the appraisal cycle for at least 90 days, the employee
is not rated.
(4) A rating should be prepared as soon as
practical after the end of the
appraisal
period, typically within 30 days and within OHRM annual appraisal
guidelines.
(5) Employee Accomplishment Reports.
SES
employees are required to provide an accomplishment report near the end of the
appraisal period as instructed in OHRM guidance. This report will address the accomplishments
and achievements made during the appraisal period and will address the
completion of any objectives and goals identified in the performance plan.
(6) Element Ratings.
(a) When
rating SES performance, the rating official assigns one of the five element ratings
below to each of the employee’s performance elements:
Outstanding
- At
the outstanding level of performance, the Senior Executive
achieves and completes all critical element requirements in an
exemplary manner. An outstanding rating
exemplifies the highest
level of performance possible and is characterized by both organizational
accomplishment and personal achievement.
The outstanding
level is representative of the executive’s influence on the
organization through innovative and effective management practices
and procedures, noteworthy program implementation, success
in building partnerships and coalitions, demonstrative responsiveness
to internal and external customers, and outstanding management
of resources. The Senior Executive’s
performance reflects
measureable and lasting improvements in organizational performance.
Superior
- At
the superior level of performance, the Senior Executive demonstrates
consistently excellent performance, where the
majority of element requirements exceed the fully successful level. The Senior Executive has demonstrated more
than effective performance
of essential requirements, has had a positive impact on mission
accomplishment, and has enhanced the performance of self and
others.
Fully
Successful - At the fully successful level of performance, the Senior Executive meets expectations and
demonstrates sound and solid performance, where all
critical element requirements are completed
in a satisfactory manner and the executive has performed
effectively. The Senior Executive has
contributed to organizational
goals and achieved meaningful results.
Minimally
Satisfactory - At the minimally satisfactory level of performance, the Senior
Executive only partially meets element requirements for the fully
successful level, and has been marginally
effective. This level of performance,
while demonstrating
some positive contributions to the organization, shows notable deficiencies.
Unsatisfactory
- At the unsatisfactory level of performance, the Senior Executive
does not meet performance requirements, and performance deficiencies resulted in
demonstrable negative consequences for the
organization. The executive is not
willing or not
able to perform the essential performance requirements.
(b) When assigning an element rating, the
rating official will indicate the element rating on
the SES Appraisal Record as the form instructs.
(c) After
evaluating each performance element, the rating official will assign the initial summary rating using the
table on the summary rating guide found on the
performance plan template. Summary rating
levels are:
Superior - Mission
Results is rated superior or above and other elements
are rated fully successful or above, and the Civil Rights element is rated fully successful.
Fully
Successful -
Mission
Results and Civil Rights elements are rated
fully successful and other elements are rated fully successful or above.
Minimally
Satisfactory –
One
or more elements rated minimally satisfactory. No elements rated unsatisfactory.
(7) Required Documentation.
The SES Appraisal Record is
the official form to document a
performance rating of record. In
addition to this form, a written
justification is required in the following situations:
(a)
A
two page justification is required for a recommendation for base salary
increase and/or performance award;
(b)
A
justification is required for an employee nominated for a Presidential Rank
Award. This justification must comply
with OPM instructions and guidance and be appropriate for the level of
competition for such an award; and
(c)
A
justification consisting of a two-page summary that provides the rationale for
the action is required for any employee who is rated “Minimally Satisfactory”
or “Unsatisfactory” and is recommended for corrective action.
l.
Approval of Ratings.
(1) The rating official derives the initial summary
rating for the SES employee, and obtains agreement from the reviewing
official. He or she prepares the
required documentation and informs the employee of his/her initial summary rating. If the employee disagrees with the rating,
then the rating official must advise the employee that he/she may respond in
writing to any aspect of the initial rating within 5 calendar days after
receiving the initial summary rating. The
employee should sign their performance plan.
Signature constitutes receipt of initial rating, not agreement of
rating.
(4) The reviewing official forwards the entire appraisal package
(to include the documentation mentioned
above) to the PRB for review.
(5) The
PRB evaluates the entire appraisal package submitted by the
reviewing official and makes written
recommendations to the Secretary with regard to the annual summary rating, base
salary increase, performance award, Presidential Rank Award, or any corrective
action based on performance.
(6)
The
senior performance official will review and analyze the package before it goes
to the Secretary for final approval. Any
issues will be resolved by the senior performance official in consultation with
the chair of the PRB prior to submission of recommendations to the Secretary.
(7)
The
Secretary makes the final decision with regard to the rating to be assigned and related
personnel actions after considering PRB recommendations. The annual summary rating approved by the
Secretary becomes the
employee’s official rating of record.
m. Processing
and Retention of Performance Ratings.
(1) Due dates established by Departmental
guidance must be adhered to in order to ensure proper and timely review by
PRBs.
(2) Performance records must be maintained
in accordance with the procedures set forth in 5 CFR 293, Personnel Records; 5
CFR 297, Privacy Act Procedures for Personnel Records; and any Departmental
Directives and Regulations concerning the Privacy Act and Freedom of
Information Act. Annual summary ratings
and the supporting performance plans must be maintained for four years. Rating officials must comply with the above
authorities in their maintenance and distribution of performance records.
(3) When an
employee’s OPF is sent to another servicing Human Resources Office within USDA,
another Federal Department, or the National Personnel Records Center, the
"losing" servicing Human Resources Office must include the last
four annual summary ratings and
performance plans, including the most recent rating and the interim appraisal
rating prepared when the employee changes positions. The "losing"
servicing Human Resources Office will purge all performance ratings,
performance plans, and the supporting performance-related documents that are
more than four years old from the OPF or EPF.
n. Performance-Based Recognition.
(1) The
annual summary rating of an employee is the basis for individual performance recognition, i.e. base
salary increase or performance award. Employees rated at the fully successful
level and higher are eligible for base
salary increases and/or performance awards.
(2) The
senior performance official in consultation with the Secretary, will issue guidelines for base salary increases
and performance award percentages. As part of the overall training of the PRB
chair and members,
compensation instructions will be discussed
to assure that all participating
executives understand how to evaluate and issue recommendations on base salary increases and performance
awards.
(3) Receiving
a performance award does not preclude the SES employee from receiving other forms of recognition
provided the recognition is not for the same
accomplishment.
(4) Executives
on limited term or limited emergency appointments and non-career SES are not eligible for performance awards
but are eligible for salary increases
based on performance.
o. Actions
Based on Less than Fully Successful Performance.
(1) SES with an annual summary rating of
minimally satisfactory or unsatisfactory may have their base salary decreased by a
percentage, as determined
by the Secretary. Written notice of at
least 15 days in advance of
the reduction in pay is required by law.
(2) Optional Removal. An executive
who receives an unsatisfactory annual summary rating must be reassigned or
transferred within the Senior Executive
Service, or removed from the Senior
Executive Service.
(3) Mandatory Removal. An executive
who receives two unsatisfactory annual summary ratings in any 5-year
period must be removed from the Senior
Executive Service. A SES who receives
less than a fully successful annual
summary rating twice in any 3-year period
must be removed from the
Senior Executive Service.
(4) When
a SES’ performance falls below fully successful (whether or not a formal
appraisal has been given), the supervisor will assist the employee in bringing
the employee’s performance to an
acceptable level. If an employee is
unsatisfactory, the supervisor should
begin steps to place the SES in a position he or she can successfully perform. The exact steps would depend on the
circumstances of the case. A minimally
satisfactory rating permits a one-year
period to show improvement, however, the base salary may be reduced by the
Secretary.
(a) A
career appointee who has completed his/her probationary period and who is being
removed from the SES for less than fully successful performance is entitled to
a 30-day advance written notice of such action.
A career appointee who is removed from SES for less than fully
successful performance is entitled to be placed in a civil service position
(other than a SES position) at the GS-15 or above, or equivalent.
(b) The
removal of a SES career executive for performance reasons is subject to the
120-day moratorium, except for a removal based on an unsatisfactory rating
given before the appointment of a new Agency Head or non-career supervisor that
initiated the action. This includes an
optional removal based on two unsatisfactory ratings in 5 years, and a
mandatory removal based on two less than fully successful ratings in 3 years
when the second rating is an unsatisfactory rating.
(c)
SES non-career and limited term
executives may be reassigned or removed from the SES at any time. Regulations require that non-career and
limited term SES receive notice in writing before the effective date of a
removal.
p. Addressing
Unsatisfactory Performance.
(1) Employee
Notification. At any time during the performance appraisal period where an
employee’s performance is determined to be unacceptable in one or more critical
elements, the rating official must:
(a)
Notify the employee, in writing, of
the critical element(s) for which
performance is unacceptable,
(b) Inform
the employee of the performance requirement(s) that must be attained to demonstrate
acceptable performance, and
(c) Inform the employee that unless his/her
performance in the critical element(s) improves to and is
sustained at an acceptable level, the employee
may be reassigned, reduced in pay or removed.
q. Minimally Satisfactory Performance.
The rating official must provide advice and assistance
to an employee on how to improve their performance. If the rating official feels that performance in one or more of the
established elements is lacking, he/she
should discuss possible corrective actions as well as the ramifications for unimproved
performance.
r. Performance-Based
Misconduct. When deciding whether the actions of a SES are misconduct or performance related, the following laws
should be reviewed: 5 USC 3592 (Removal
from the Senior Executive Service) and 5 USC 7543 (Cause and Procedure).
s. Savings
Provision. Administrative actions initiated against employees whose performance is “Unsatisfactory” under 5 U.S.C. 4303 and
the USDA Performance Management Plan or
another program in existence prior to the effective
date of this Program, shall continue to be processed consistent with that pre-established set
of procedures and requirements.
t. Contact
Human Resources. Supervisors and managers are strongly encouraged to contact
their servicing Human Resources Office for additional advice and guidance
when addressing performance less than fully successful.
10. RIGHTS OF THE SENIOR EXECUTIVE
a. By
law, a Senior Executive may not appeal the annual summary rating and the rating
is not grievable. A career executive,
however, may file a complaint with
the Office of Special Counsel on any aspect of the rating process that the executive believes to
involve a prohibited personnel practice.
b. A
removal for performance is not appealable to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
However, a career executive may request an informal hearing before MSPB at
least 15 days before the effective date of removal. A career executive
and/or a representative may appear and present arguments. The conduct of an informal
hearing does not delay the effective date of the removal. MSPB has indicated
that it lacks authority to change a performance rating or to order a specific
remedy, however, it can comment on the executive’s arguments and recommend
appropriate action if a serious defect in the personnel action is manifest.
11. LINKING PERFORMANCE TO OTHER PERSONNEL
ACTIONS
a. Annual
Summary Rating.
The rating of record has a bearing on various other personnel
actions, such as probationary periods, promotions, training and development, pay increases,
performance awards, and determining additional retention
service credit in a reduction in force. A summary rating of at least “Fully Successful” will
provide the basis for an employee’s retention in the SES pay system and
will establish the employee’s eligibility for consideration for performance
awards and base pay increases.
b. Probationary
Period.
(1) New
career SES must serve a 1-year probationary period. Satisfactory completion of the probationary period
is a pre-requisite for retention in the SES. The probationary period begins on the
effective date of the initial SES
career appointment and ends one calendar year later.
(2) The supervisor of the new career SES has
the following responsibilities during the probationary period:
(a)
Must follow through on agency initiated or
Qualifications Review Board recommended
training,
(b)
Observe the employee’s performance and
conduct,
(c)
Hold periodic, documented discussions of
progress with the employee
clearly outlining strengths and weaknesses of the employee in relation to the performance requirements,
(d)
Complete Form 773, Supervisory or
Managerial Probationary Period
Report, and an interim rating on the SES Appraisal Record, and submit to OHRM at least 60 days prior to
completion of the employee’s
probationary period. If the employee’s
performance is evaluated as less
than fully successful, appropriate supporting documentation
must be submitted with the probationary period package,
and
(e)
If
the probationer’s managerial or professional/technical performance is
unacceptable, consider whether remedial action (such as specialized training or
assignment to other SES duties) or removal action, is appropriate.
12. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS
a. OHRM
will develop and provide initial webcast training for the purpose of educating SES employees and their supervisors of the new
Department-wide pay- for-performance
system.
b. Agency and Staff Office Human Resources
Offices are responsible for training
new employees upon entering SES; for including content on SES
performance management in supervisory training sessions; and for providing
refresher training, briefings, and information on all aspects of the
performance management system on a regular recurring basis for all executives
(both supervisors and employees).
c.
Performance management training must
include the following components:
(1) The concepts and practical use of
performance management;
(2) Managing performance for results;
(3)
Linking individual performance to
organizational goals;
(4)
The performance appraisal process;
(5)
Establishing and applying objective
measures of performance;
(6)
Using rewards and recognition to achieve
and sustain higher levels of performance;
(7)
Addressing performance deficiencies;
(8)
Developing competencies;
(9)
Giving and receiving feedback; and
(10)
Communicating organizational performance
with employees.
d.
Methodologies used to train supervisors
and employees may include:
(1) Classroom;
(2) Automated or online training modules
such as AgLearn;
(3) Distance learning programs;
(4) Formal and informal discussions between
supervisors and employees;
(5)
Employee briefings;
(6)
Supervisory
and leadership training;
(7)
Webcast
training; and
(8) Employee orientation materials.
13. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM EVALUATION
a. The
senior performance official is responsible for evaluating data and feedback from the PRBs and advising the Secretary and the
Secretary’s ERB along with other
key officials of any changes or corrective actions associated with the performance
management system. Changes and
corrective action are taken in collaboration
with the Office of Human Resources Management.
b. USDA
will evaluate its SES performance appraisal system as required for OPM and OMB system
certification.