[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38442-38448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15641]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 21, 2000 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 38442]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 430
RIN 3206-AI57
Managing Senior Executive Performance
AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule with request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposes to amend its
regulations governing performance appraisal in the Senior Executive
Service (SES). The proposed regulations will help agencies hold senior
executives accountable by: reinforcing the link between performance
management and strategic planning; requiring agencies to use balanced
measures in evaluating executive performance; and increasing agency
flexibility to tailor performance management systems to their unique
mission requirements and organizational climate.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 21, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver written comments to Joyce Edwards, Director,
Office of Executive Resources Management, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management, 1900 E Street NW, Room 6484, Washington, DC 20415.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Kirby, (202) 606-1610, or email
to SESmgmt@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 7,000 members of the Senior Executive
Service (SES) are dedicated, hard-working public servants. Individually
and through the organizations they lead, these senior executives strive
to deliver value to Americans.
This results-orientation was central to the original vision for the
SES. As envisioned by the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) of 1978, SES
performance management systems should:
``Ensure accountability for honest, economical, and
efficient Government;''
``Assure that senior executives are accountable and
responsible for the effectiveness and productivity of employees under
them;''
``Ensure that compensation, retention, and tenure are
contingent on executive success which is measured on the basis of
individual and organizational performance;''
``Recognize exceptional accomplishment.''
The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 and the
National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR) validated the
CSRA's original vision and challenged Government to shift its focus
from internal processes and outputs to results that are aligned with
customer expectations.
In the discussions triggered by OPM's 1998 Draft Framework for
Improving the Senior Executive Service, executives and other
stakeholders indicated that our current regulations discourage results-
oriented performance management. In addition, stakeholders told us that
agency leaders must drive the effort to strengthen their SES
performance management systems. Respondents to the 1999 Survey of the
Senior Executive Service reinforced these findings:
Only 72% believe their performance rating represents a
fair and accurate picture of their performance;
Only 48% believe SES bonus determinations are based on
merit; and
57% do not think poor performing executives are removed
from their positions.
Survey findings are available on OPM's website (www.opm.gov/SES).
The proposed SES performance management regulations give agencies
flexibility to reinvigorate their SES performance management systems--
to focus on results over process. They also reinforce the agencies--
responsibility to communicate performance expectations and to use the
results of the performance management process as a basis for
performance awards and other personnel decisions.
The proposed regulations also require SES performance management
systems to balance organizational results with the needs and
perspectives of customers and employees. Introduction of the balanced
scorecard concept in 1992 by Robert Kaplan and David Norton of the
Harvard Business School as well as recent studies by the National
Partnership for Reinventing Government and others have shown that both
the public and private sectors are increasingly and successfully using
balanced measurement to help create high-performing organizations. They
indicate that an approach to performance planning, management, and
measurement that balances the needs and perspectives of customers,
stakeholders, employees, or others with the achievement of the
organization's business or operational results is critical to
successful improvement efforts.
By institutionalizing the use of balanced measures, the Government
acknowledges what its best executives have always known: leading people
and building customer coalitions are the foundation of organizational
success. In the 1999 SES survey, career executives reported that
``leading people'' and ``building coalitions'' are the most important
contributors to executive success now, and they will be even more
important in the future.
Overall Approach
Subpart C is totally revised to organize the material more
logically and to use plain language, as directed by the President in
June 1998.
The purpose statement is revised to stress:
Expecting excellence in senior executive performance;
Holding executives accountable for results;
Communicating regularly about goals and expectations;
Appraising senior executive performance using measures
that balance organizational results with customer, employee, or other
perspectives; and
Making performance the basis for pay, awards, and other
personnel decisions.
This emphasis is fundamental to the key changes in the subpart.
The proposals broaden the focus from the annual summary rating
aspects of performance appraisal to managing performance on an ongoing
basis and shift the emphasis from process to results. The subpart is
restructured to establish separate sections on the key components of
performance management: planning and communicating, monitoring,
appraising,
[[Page 38443]]
and rating performance and using performance results.
The proposals pare many of the current regulatory requirements back
to the statutory requirements and remove others to give agencies more
flexibility to design performance management approaches that better fit
their unique and changing mission needs and organizational climate. We
have eliminated requirements that are unnecessarily constraining and
burdensome to agencies or are process-bound. The changes balance the
agencies' desire for maximum flexibility with the need for a corporate
approach that safeguards merit principles and contributes to a better,
results-oriented Government. This approach is also consistent with
OPM's earlier initiative to provide more flexibility in how agencies
implement performance management for the general workforce (August 23,
1995 Federal Register, 60 FR 43936).
Key Changes in Current Requirements
System requirements are modified to prescribe a framework for
agency systems that identifies key system components, without
specifying how these components will be implemented. Within this
framework, agencies can design performance management systems to meet
their unique mission requirements and organizational climate.
Minimum appraisal period is modified to permit agencies to
establish minimum appraisal periods that are longer than 120 days. The
minimum appraisal period must be at least 90 days, as currently
required, provided there is enough information on which to base a
rating.
Performance standards are now called performance requirements to
reflect the term used in statute. Performance requirements will be
established for critical elements and any other performance elements
that will be used to appraise performance and derive the annual summary
rating. The term noncritical element is no longer required.
Appraisal criteria are amended to require balanced measurement.
Rating level requirements are modified to remove the requirement to
establish three rating levels for each critical element. The
performance of each critical element and any other performance elements
must be appraised.
Summary rating level requirements are modified to the minimum three
summary rating levels prescribed in statute (i.e., fully successful,
minimally satisfactory, and unsatisfactory). The current maximum of
five levels (i.e., no more than two levels above fully successful) is
removed.
Rating terms are revised to reflect the statutory requirement for
an annual summary rating. There are now only two rating terms: the
initial rating becomes initial summary rating and the final rating
becomes the annual summary rating. References to other types of ratings
are removed.
Method for deriving summary ratings is modified to remove the
current requirement to give critical elements more weight than non-
critical elements in determining a summary rating.
Additional Guidance
OPM will issue additional guidance in various formats to help
agencies implement the changes, including model performance management
systems and examples of ways to use the various flexibilities provided
under these regulations. This guidance will address how agencies are to
obtain OPM approval of revised performance management systems, in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4312. We will also share information about how
public and private sector organizations are using balanced measurement
to evaluate senior executive performance.
Table of Changes
The following table lists all of the proposed changes to the
current regulations. The ``current rule'' column lists the regulations
in the current subpart C that are affected by the proposed regulations.
The ``proposed rule'' column shows the disposition of the current
rules. The third column explains each change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current rule Proposed rule Explanation of change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
430.301(a).............................. 430.301(a)................. Plain language edits.
430.301(b).............................. 430.301(b)................. Revises purpose to emphasize expecting
excellence, holding senior executives
accountable for results, communicating
goals and expectations, factoring
balanced measurement into performance
appraisal, and making performance the
basis for personnel decisions.
430.302(a).............................. 430.302(a)................. Plain language edits.
430.302(b).............................. 430.302(b)................. Plain language edits.
430.303................................. 430.303.................... Revises definitions as follows:
Annual summary rating replaces the term
summary rating to reflect the statutory
terminology and means the overall rating
level the appointing authority assigns at
the end of the appraisal period after
considering PRB recommendations.
Appointing authority is revised to
clarify that this individual must be
authorized to make SES appointments.
Appraisal is replaced with performance
appraisal and edited for plain language.
Appraisal period reflects plain
language edits.
Appraisal system is replaced with the
term performance management system to
broaden the focus from the annual
appraisal to managing performance on an
ongoing basis.
Balanced measures is added because the
regulations require agencies to use
balanced measurement to evaluate senior
executive performance.
Critical element is broadened to cover
the senior executive's work, which may
include more than the duties of the
position, and focus on organizational
results.
Final rating is replaced with the term
used in statute, annual summary rating,
and edited for plain language.
Initial rating is replaced with initial
summary rating and revised for clarity.
Non-critical elements is replaced with
the broader term, other performance
elements, which refers to components of
an executive's work that are not critical
but may be important enough to factor
into the executive's appraisal.
[[Page 38444]]
Performance is broadened from the focus
on critical and non-critical elements of
the position to the accomplishment of
work described in the senior executive's
performance plan.
Performance appraisal is added to
replace appraisal and edited for plain
language.
Performance Appraisal System is
replaced with the term performance
management system, which refers to a
framework of policies and practices for
planning, monitoring, developing,
evaluating, and rewarding individual and
organizational performance and for using
performance information as a basis for
personnel decisions.
Performance management plan is deleted.
The concepts are covered under
performance management systems.
Performance plan is replaced with the
term senior executive performance plan
which is expanded to address work the
senior executive is expected to
accomplish and the requirements against
which performance will be evaluated.
Performance standard is replaced by the
term performance requirement used in
statute and reflects plain language
edits.
Progress review reflects plain language
edits.
Rating of record is deleted.
Summary rating is replaced with annual
summary rating.
Strategic planning initiatives is added
because of new requirements for aligning
performance plans with strategic
planning.
430.304................................. 430.304.................... Retitles section as SES Performance
Management Systems; edits substantially
and restructures it to include the key
components of agency systems. Moves
other requirements to other sections in
the subpart.
430.304(a).............................. 430.304(a)................. Plain language edits.
430.304(b).............................. 430.305(b)................. Moves critical element requirements to
Planning and Communicating Performance.
Replaces reference to non-critical
elements with the broader other
performance elements.
430.307(a)................. Moves appraisal requirements to
Appraising Performance; revises them to
reflect deletion of term non-critical
elements.
430.308(d)................. Moves summary rating requirements to
Rating Performance.
430.304(c).............................. 430.304(b)................. Planning performance becomes a key
component of performance management
systems.
430.305(a)................. Moves requirements for individual senior
executive performance plans to Planning
and Communicating Performance.
430.304(d)(1)........................... 430.304(b)................. Replaces performance standards with the
statutory term performance requirements;
some provisions are included in
performance management system
requirements.
430.305.................... Moves establishing and communicating
critical elements and requirements to
Planning and Communicating Performance.
430.307(a)................. Moves annual appraisal requirements to
Appraising Performance.
430.304(d)(2)........................... 430.304(b)(1).............. Includes accomplishing organizational
430.305.................... objectives in requirements to address
organizational performance and to link
performance management with GPRA goals
and with strategic planning initiatives.
430.304(e).............................. 430.305(b)................. Revises section to eliminate the
requirement to establish three rating
levels for each critical element.
Replaces performance standards with
performance requirements and moves it to
senior executive plan requirements under
Planning and Communicating Performance.
430.304(f).............................. 430.304(c)(3).............. Edits derivation method requirements to
remove references to noncritical
elements and moves it to system
requirements. New section incorporates
restriction on rating level
distribution.
430.304(g).............................. 430.304(c)(2).............. Modifies summary rating level
requirements to reflect the statutory
requirement for a minimum of three
levels. Removes the 5-level maximum and
rating level numbers.
430.304(h).............................. 430.306(c)................. Broadens requirement for performance
assistance to require agencies to help
senior executives improve their
performance, not just those who are
rated less than fully successful, to
reflect the emphasis on overall
performance improvement.
430.304(i).............................. 430.309(c)................. Edits requirements for action on less
than successful performance ratings and
moves them to the new section, Using
Performance Results. This section is
added to focus on basing personnel
decisions on performance.
430.305.................... Adds two new sections on Planning and
Communicating Performance and Monitoring
Performance, which are key components of
performance management systems.
Consolidates senior executive plan
requirements under Planning and
Communicating Performance.
430.306.................... Consolidates progress review and
performance improvement requirements
under monitoring performance.
430.305................................. 430.307.................... Retitles heading as Appraising
Performance, a key component of
personnel management systems.
430.305(a)(1)........................... 430.304(c)(1).............. Moves appraisal period requirements to
System Requirements.
430.307(b)................. Moves rating performance on details and
temporary assignments to Appraising
Performance. Replaces summary rating
requirement with requirement to appraise
performance and factor appraisal into
initial summary rating.
430.305(a)(2)........................... 430.304(c)(1)(ii).......... Edits provisions for terminating the
appraisal period and moves them to
System Requirements.
[[Page 38445]]
430.305(a)(3)........................... 430.304(c)(1)(iii)......... Edits restriction on appraisals and
ratings during Presidential election
periods and moves it to System
Requirements.
430.305(b).............................. 430.304(c)(1)(i)........... Revises minimum appraisal period to
eliminate the 120-day maximum and moves
it to System Requirements.
430.305(c).............................. 430.307(a)(1).............. Revises requirement to require appraisal
on critical elements only `` appraising
other elements is optional.
430.305(d)(1) and 430.305(d)(2)......... 430.307(b)(1), Substantially edits requirements for
430.307(b)(2), and appraising performance on details and
430.307(b)(3). temporary assignments. Modifies the
current requirement for a rating on
critical elements to appraising
performance and factoring that appraisal
into the initial summary rating.
430.305(e).............................. 430.306(b)................. Edits progress review requirements and
moves them to Monitoring Performance.
430.306................................. 430.308.................... Retitles heading as Rating Performance, a
key component of personnel management
systems.
430.306(a)(1)........................... 430.308(a)................. Plain language edits.
430.306(a)(2)........................... 430.308(a)................. Plain language edits.
430.306(a)(3)........................... 430.308(b)................. Plain language edits.
430.306(a)(4)........................... 430.308(b), 430.308(c)..... Plain language edits.
430.306(a)(5)........................... 430.308(b)................. Removes specific section; provisions are
inherent in higher level review
requirements.
430.306(b).............................. 430.308(b)................. Adds requirement that higher level
reviewer may not change initial summary
rating, but can recommend a different
rating to PRB and appointing authority.
Plain language edits.
430.308(c)................. Adds new section in Rating Performance on
PRB review for clarity.
430.306(c).............................. 430.308(d)................. Changes term final rating to annual
summary rating for consistency with
statutory language and edits for plain
language.
430.306(d).............................. 430.304(c)(3).............. Includes requirement in derivation
methods under System Requirements and
edits for plain language.
430.306(e).............................. 430.308(e)................. Includes under new section, extending the
rating period; edits for plain language.
430.308(f)................. States statutory language regarding
appealability of appraisals and ratings.
430.306(f).............................. 430.307(b)................. Modifies requirement for summary rating
on transfer to a written appraisal which
the gaining supervisor must factor into
the annual summary rating. Plain
language edits.
430.306(g).............................. 430.308(a)................. Deletes section; incorporates
430.308(b)................. requirements for executive notification
in relevant sections.
430.311(c)................. Edits documentation maintenance and moves
them to Training and Evaluation.
430.307................................. 430.310.................... Plain language edits.
430.307(a).............................. 430.310(a)(1).............. Plain language edits.
430.307(b).............................. 430.310(a)(4).............. Plain language edits.
430.307(c).............................. 430.310(a)(2).............. Plain language edits.
430.307(d).............................. 430.310(a)(3).............. Deletes reference to OPM authority to
waive requirement for career majority on
PRBs. Authority is stated in statute.
430.307(e).............................. 430.310(b)(1).............. Plain language edits.
430.307(f).............................. 430.310(b)(3).............. Plain language edits.
430.307(g).............................. 430.301(b)(2).............. Plain language edits.
430.308................................. 430.311(a) 430.311(b)...... Plain language edits.
430.309(a).............................. 430.312(b)................. Plain language edits.
430.309(b).............................. 430.312(c)................. Plain language edits.
430.310................................. 430.312(a)................. Moves requirement to section on OPM
review of agency systems and edits for
plain language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review
This proposed rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the
regulations pertain only to Federal employees and agencies.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 430
Government employees, Performance management.
Office of Personnel Management.
Janice R. Lachance,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM proposes to amend 5 CFR Part 430 as follows:
PART 430--PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. chapter 43.
2. Subpart C is revised to read as follows:
Subpart C--Managing Senior Executive Performance
Sec.
430.301 General.
430.302 Coverage.
430.303 Definitions.
430.304 SES performance management systems.
430.305 Planning and communicating performance.
430.306 Monitoring performance.
430.307 Appraising performance.
430.308 Rating performance.
430.309 Using performance results.
430.310 Performance Review Boards (PRBs)
430.311 Training and evaluation.
430.312 OPM review of agency systems.
Subpart C--Managing Senior Executive Performance
Sec. 430.301 General.
(a) Statutory authority. Chapter 43 of title 5, United States Code,
provides for performance management for the Senior
[[Page 38446]]
Executive Service (SES), the establishment of SES performance appraisal
systems, and appraisal of senior executive performance. This subpart
prescribes regulations for managing SES performance to implement the
statutory provisions at 5 U.S.C. 4311-4315.
(b) Purpose. The regulations in this subpart require agencies to
establish performance management systems that hold senior executives
accountable for their individual and organizational performance in
order to improve the overall performance of Government by--
(1) Expecting excellence in senior executive performance;
(2) Linking performance management with the results-oriented goals
of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993;
(3) Setting and communicating individual and organizational goals
and expectations;
(4) Systematically appraising senior executive performance using
measures that balance organizational results with customer, employee,
or other perspectives; and
(5) Using performance results as a basis for pay, awards,
development, retention, removal, and other personnel decisions.
Sec. 430.302 Coverage.
(a) This subpart applies to all senior executives covered by
subchapter II of chapter 31 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) This subpart applies to agencies identified in section
3132(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code.
Sec. 430.303 Definitions.
Terms used in this subpart are defined as follows:
Appointing authority means the department or agency head, or other
official with authority to make appointments in the Senior Executive
Service.
Appraisal period means the established period of time for which a
senior executive's performance will be appraised and rated.
Balanced measures means an approach to performance measurement that
balances organizational results with the perspectives of distinct
groups, including customers and employees.
Critical element means a key component of an executive's work that
contributes to organizational goals and results and is so important
that unsatisfactory performance of the element would make the
executive's overall job performance unsatisfactory.
Other performance elements means components of an executive's work
that do not meet the definition of a critical element, but may be
important enough to factor into the executive's performance appraisal.
Performance means the accomplishment of the work described in the
senior executive's performance plan.
Performance appraisal means the review and evaluation of a senior
executive's performance against performance elements and requirements.
Performance management system means the framework of policies and
practices that an agency establishes under subchapter II of chapter 43
of title 5, United States Code, and this subpart, for planning,
monitoring, developing, evaluating, and rewarding both individual and
organizational performance and for using resulting performance
information in making personnel decisions.
Performance requirement means a statement of the performance
expected for a critical element.
Progress review means a review of the senior executive's progress
in meeting the performance requirements. A progress review is not a
performance rating.
Ratings:
(1) Initial summary rating means an overall rating level the
supervisor derives from appraising the senior executive's performance
during the appraisal period and forwards to the Performance Review
Board.
(2) Annual summary rating means the overall rating level that an
appointing authority assigns at the end of the appraisal period after
considering a Performance Review Board's recommendations. This is the
official rating.
Senior executive performance plan means the written summary of work
the senior executive is expected to accomplish during the appraisal
period and the requirements against which performance will be
evaluated. The plan addresses all critical elements and any other
performance elements established for the senior executive.
Strategic planning initiatives means agency strategic plans, annual
performance plans, organizational workplans, and other related
initiatives.
Sec. 430.304 SES performance management systems.
(a) To encourage excellence in senior executive performance, each
agency must develop and administer one or more performance management
systems for its senior executives.
(b) Performance management systems must provide for:
(1) Planning and communicating performance elements and
requirements that are linked with strategic planning initiatives;
(2) Consulting with senior executives on the development of
performance elements and requirements;
(3) Monitoring progress in accomplishing elements and requirements;
(4) At least annually, appraising each senior executive's
performance against requirements using measures that balance
organizational results with customer and employee perspectives; and
(5) Using performance information to adjust pay, reward, reassign,
develop, and remove senior executives or make other personnel
decisions.
(c) Additional system requirements.
(1) Appraisal period. Each agency must establish an official
performance appraisal period for which an annual summary rating must be
prepared.
(i) There must be a minimum appraisal period of at least 90 days.
(ii) An agency may end the appraisal period any time after the
minimum appraisal period is completed, if there is an adequate basis on
which to appraise and rate the senior executive's performance.
(iii) An agency may not appraise and rate a career appointee's
performance within 120 days after the beginning of a new President's
term of office.
(2) Summary performance levels. Each performance management system
must have at least three summary performance levels: one or more fully
successful levels, a minimally satisfactory level, and an
unsatisfactory level.
(3) Method for deriving summary ratings. Agencies must develop a
method for deriving summary ratings from appraisals of performance
against performance requirements. The method must ensure that only
those employees whose performance exceeds normal expectations are rated
at levels above fully successful. An agency may not prescribe a forced
distribution of rating levels for senior executives.
Sec. 430.305 Planning and communicating performance.
(a) Each senior executive must have a performance plan that
describes the individual and organizational expectations for the
appraisal period and sets the requirements against which performance
will be evaluated. Supervisors must develop performance plans in
consultation with senior executives and communicate the plans to them
on or before the beginning of the appraisal period.
[[Page 38447]]
(b) Performance plan requirements:
(1) Critical elements. At a minimum, plans must describe the
critical elements of the senior executive's work and any other relevant
performance elements. Elements must reflect individual and
organizational performance.
(2) Performance requirements. At a minimum, plans must describe the
level of performance expected for fully successful performance of the
executive's work. These are the standards against which the senior
executive's performance will be appraised.
(3) Link with strategic planning initiatives. Critical elements and
performance requirements for each senior executive must be consistent
with the goals and performance expectations in the agency's strategic
planning initiatives.
Sec. 430.306 Monitoring performance.
(a) Supervisors must monitor each senior executive's performance
during the appraisal period and provide feedback to the senior
executive on progress in accomplishing the performance elements and
requirements described in the performance plan. Supervisors must
provide advice and assistance to senior executives on how to improve
their performance.
(b) Supervisors must hold a progress review for each senior
executive at least once during the appraisal period. At a minimum,
senior executives must be informed about how well they are performing
against performance requirements.
Sec. 430.307 Appraising performance.
(a) Annual appraisals. Agencies must appraise each senior
executive's performance in writing and assign an annual summary rating
at the end of the appraisal period.
(1) At a minimum, a senior executive must be appraised on the
performance of the critical elements in the performance plan.
(2) Appraisals of senior executive performance must be based on
both individual and organizational performance, taking into account
such factors as--
(i) Results achieved in accordance with the goals of the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993;
(ii) Customer satisfaction;
(iii) Employee perspectives;
(iv) The effectiveness, productivity, and performance quality of
the employees for whom the senior executive is responsible; and
(v) Meeting affirmative action, equal employment opportunity, and
diversity goals and complying with the merit system principles set
forth under section 2301 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Details and job changes. (1) When a senior executive is
detailed or temporarily reassigned for 120 days or longer, the gaining
organization must set performance goals and requirements for the detail
or temporary assignment. The gaining organization must appraise the
senior executive's performance appraised in writing, and this appraisal
must be factored into the initial summary rating.
(2) When a senior executive changes jobs or transfers to another
agency after completing the minimum appraisal period, the supervisor
must appraise the executive's performance in writing before the
executive leaves.
(3) The annual summary rating and any subsequent appraisals must be
transferred to the gaining agency. The gaining supervisor must consider
the rating and appraisals when developing the initial summary rating at
the end of the appraisal period.
Sec. 430.308 Rating performance.
(a) Initial summary rating. The supervisor must develop an initial
summary rating of the senior executive's performance, in writing, and
share that rating with the senior executive. The senior executive may
respond in writing.
(b) Higher level review. The senior executive may ask a higher
level official to review the initial summary rating before the rating
is given to the Performance Review Board (PRB). The senior executive is
entitled to one higher level review, unless the agency provides for
more than one review level. The higher level official cannot change the
supervisor's initial summary rating, but may recommend a different
rating to the PRB and the appointing authority. Copies of the
reviewer's findings and recommendations must be given to the senior
executive, the supervisor, and the PRB.
(c) PRB review. The initial summary rating, the senior executive's
response to the initial rating, and the higher level official's
comments must be given to the PRB. The PRB must review the rating and
comments from the senior executive and the higher level official, and
make recommendations to the appointing authority, as provided in
Sec. 430.310.
(d) Annual summary rating. The appointing authority must assign the
annual summary rating of the senior executive's performance, in
writing, after considering any PRB recommendations. This rating is the
official rating.
(e) Extending the rating period. When an agency cannot prepare an
annual summary rating at the end of the appraisal period because the
senior executive has not completed the minimum appraisal period or for
other reasons, the agency must extend the executive's appraisal period.
The agency will then prepare the annual summary rating.
(f) Appeals. Senior executive performance appraisals and ratings
are not appealable.
Sec. 430.309 Using performance results.
(a) Agencies will use the results of performance appraisals and
ratings as a basis for adjusting pay, granting awards, and making other
personnel decisions. Performance information will also be a factor in
assessing a senior executive's continuing development needs.
(b) A career executive whose annual summary rating is at least
fully successful may be given a performance award under part 534,
subpart D, of this chapter.
(c) An executive may be removed from the SES for performance
reasons, subject to the provisions of part 359, subpart E, of this
chapter.
(1) 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;
(2) An executive who receives two unsatisfactory annual summary
ratings in any 5-year period must be removed from the Senior Executive
Service; and
(3) An executive who receives less than a fully successful annual
summary rating twice in any 3-year period must be removed from the
Senior Executive Service.
Sec. 430.310 Performance Review Boards (PRBs).
Each agency must establish one or more PRBs to make recommendations
to the appointing authority on the performance of its senior
executives.
(a) Membership. (1) Each PRB must have three or more members who
are appointed by the agency head, or by another official or group
acting on behalf of the agency head. Agency heads are encouraged to
include women, minorities, and people with disabilities on PRBs.
(2) PRB members must be appointed in a way that assures
consistency, stability, and objectivity in SES performance appraisal.
(3) When appraising a career appointee's performance or
recommending a career appointee for a performance award, more than one-
half
[[Page 38448]]
of the PRB's members must be SES career appointees.
(4) The agency must publish notice of PRB appointments in the
Federal Register before service begins.
(b) Functions. (1) Each PRB must review and evaluate the initial
summary rating, the senior executive's response, and the higher level
official's comments on the initial summary rating, and conduct any
further review needed to make its recommendations.
(2) The PRB must make a written recommendation to the appointing
authority about each senior executive's annual summary rating.
(3) PRB members may not take part in any PRB deliberations
involving their own appraisals.
Sec. 430.311 Training and evaluation.
(a) To assure that agency performance management systems are
effectively implemented, agencies must provide appropriate information
and training to supervisors and senior executives on performance
management, including planning and appraising performance.
(b) Agencies must periodically evaluate the effectiveness of their
performance management system(s) and implement improvements as needed.
(c) Agencies must maintain all performance-related records for no
less than 5 years from the date the annual summary rating is issued, as
required in Sec. 293.404(b)(1) of this chapter.
Sec. 430.312 OPM review of agency systems.
(a) Agencies must submit proposed SES performance management
systems to OPM for approval.
(b) OPM will review agency systems for compliance with the
requirements of law, OPM regulations, and OPM performance management
policy.
(c) If OPM finds that an agency system does not meet the
requirements and intent of subchapter II of chapter 43 of title 5,
United States Code, or of this subpart, it will direct the agency to
take corrective action, and the agency must comply.
[FR Doc. 00-15641 Filed 6-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-P