Senior Executive Service SES Performance Appraisal System February

Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Appraisal System February 2012

Senior Executive Service (SES) Appraisal System Overview Drawing from leading practices in Federal agencies and the private sector, agency representatives – including SES members – from 29 agencies and organizations developed a Senior Executive Service (SES) performance appraisal system to meet the needs of Executive Branch agencies and their SES members. Key aspects: • Under the new system, agencies will be able to rely upon a more consistent and uniform framework to communicate expectations and evaluate the performance of SES members. • In particular, the system focuses on the role and responsibility of SES members to achieve results through effective executive leadership. • While promoting greater consistency, the new system will enhance clarity, transferability, and equity in the development of performance requirements, the delivery of feedback, the derivation of ratings, and the link to compensation. 2

Background on Creation of a New SES Appraisal System Action/Activity Timeline Convened regular meetings for interagency executive-level SES Performance Management Workgroup and subject matter expert Design Team July – September 2011 Benchmarked leading practices with Federal and private sectors August – September 2011 Consulted with stakeholders August – September 2011 Conducted SES focus groups September 2011 Briefed Congressional staff September 2011 Organized interagency review September 2011 System implementation launched with “early adopters” December 2011 Issued new SES appraisal system design January 2012 3

Why Do We Need a New System? With a different system in each agency, inconsistency has been a problem: • Different definitions for rating levels across government • Mix of four- and five-level rating systems • Variable application of rating levels in evaluating SES This has led to a disparity in ratings distribution across government: • In FY 2010, 47% of SES across government received the top performance rating, ranging from 23% to 73% SES mobility is more complicated – for executives moving between agencies (or considering it), there’s been uncertainty regarding performance evaluations. The new system addresses all of these issues. 4

What Are the Major Improvements Provided by the SES Appraisal System? Previous Approach Key Features of the Basic SES Appraisal System Wide range of performance elements and definitions across agencies Five performance elements based on the five ECQs, with Governmentwide performance requirements Mix of four- and five-level rating systems, inconsistent derivation formulas Five-level rating system in all agencies • Established performance standards for each rating level • Standard numerical rating derivation formula Varying emphasis on leadership Minimum weighting for all ECQs, ensuring competencies accountability for demonstrating leadership skills Wide disparity in distribution of ratings by agency Clear, descriptive performance standards and rating score ranges that establish mid-level ratings as the norm and top-level ratings as truly exceptional Different agency appraisal forms, complicating mobility and cross-Govt. comparisons Standard performance appraisal form with flexibility for limited customization by agencies No requirement for summary narrative to explain ratings Mandatory summary rating narrative, promoting richer feedback for SES 5

SES Appraisal System: Guiding Principles and Foundational Benefits SES Performance Appraisal System Design Project Guiding Principles Foundational Benefits to SES Consistency Created with a common language; promotes consistent evaluations across agencies Integrity Developed with government-wide collaboration and agreement Fairness Promotes equitable evaluation across government Leadership-Focused SES members are accountable for demonstrating executive-level leadership, using the Executive Core Qualifications (ECQs) as a basis. Clarity Facilitates a clearer path to full certification Flexibility Agencies can customize performance metrics while maintaining the system’s overall consistency Best Demonstrated Practice Informed by best practices 6

SES Appraisal System: Details on Key Design Features • Critical Elements • Rating Levels • Derivation Formula • Standard Form 7

SES Appraisal System: Key Design Features – Critical Elements • Five critical elements based upon each of the five ECQs – standard Governmentwide performance requirements with flexibility to add agency-specific performance requirements. • Agencies may develop additional validated critical elements; however, such additions will constitute major system changes requiring OPM approval. • Each critical element must have a minimum weight: -- 20% for the Results Driven element (where results and mission commitments will be captured). -- 5% for each of the remaining elements. -- No Minimally Satisfactory override at the critical element level • Results Driven critical element must meet certification requirements (e. g. , measurable outcomes). Broad flexibility and deference accorded to agencies in other critical elements. 8

SES Appraisal System Key Design Features – Rating Levels • Five rating levels with standard numeric identifiers to provide consistency and numerical scoring for summary rating, ranging from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) • Default labels that may be customized by agencies: – Unsatisfactory (1) – Minimally Satisfactory (2) – Fully Successful (3) – Exceeds Fully Successful (4) – Outstanding (5) • Government-wide performance standards defined for each of the five rating levels, applying to each of the critical elements. 9

SES Appraisal System Key Design Features – Derivation Formula • Numerical derivation formula: score for each critical element multiplied by the weight of each critical element, added together to determine a summary score. • Derivation ranges for summary score: Overall Summary Rating Scoring Ranges Level 5 475 -500 Level 4 400 -474 Level 3 300 -399 Level 2 200 -299 Level 1 Any critical element rated Level 1 10

SES Appraisal System Key Design Features – Standard Form • Standard performance appraisal form with flexibility for limited customization by agencies. • Mandatory summary rating narrative with flexibility for agency implementation (e. g. , general overall summary v. summary on each performance element). • Space to provide flexibility for agencies to capture additional agencyspecific processes or document additional information (e. g. , Executive Development Plan, narrative for higher level review, etc. ). 11

SES Appraisal System Next Steps: Implementation Phased Implementation, with Early Implementing Agencies • Agencies may implement the new system as their certifications near expiration, or sooner if desired. • A number of agencies are implementing the new system during FY 2012; these agencies will share lessons learned and recommendations for improvements or modifications. Subsequent Sub Groups, Continuing Work in FY 2012 on Additional Assignments, including: • • Implementation; Communications; Training; and Improvements to the SES Performance Appraisal Certification Process. Evaluation and Recommendations for Improvement • OPM will convene an interagency group of interested agencies to gather and review implementation results at the end of FY 2012, and to prepare any recommendations for system improvement in FY 2013. 12

For more Information Contact: Karen Lebing Group Manager Performance Management Implementation U. S. Office of Personnel Management Karen. Lebing@opm. gov 13