Cabezon Creek WSA, NM
BLM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Fuels management Fire operations SEAT Briefing Smokejumper
Fire and Aviation
Human Resources>Rating Performance
Print Page
Rating Performance

Rating of Record

  • By October 30th the rating official reviews the performance of each employee, assigns a rating level to each performance element and assigns an overall summary rating
  • The rating assigned reflects the level of the employee’s performance as compared to the established standards, understanding that each and every criterion in the standard does not have to be met by the employee in absolute terms to assign a particular rating level
  • The rating official must write a narrative summary for each critical element assigned a rating of Exceptional (E), Minimally Successful (MS) or Unsatisfactory (U). In addition, all E, MS or U ratings must be reviewed and approved by a the employees second level supervisor prior to discussion of the rating with the employee
  • The rating official discusses the completed EPAP with the employee after any required approvals are obtained

Supplemental Comments

The employee may submit written supplemental comments to the overall rating of record, the element ratings and/or the narrative comments. For example the employee may want to provide information on noteworthy accomplishments that the rating official did not include. NOTE: THIS PROCESS MAY BE UTILIZED ONLY WHEN THE EMPLOYEE IS NOT CONTESTING THE RATING RECEIVED ON A GIVEN ELEMENT, WHICH, IF CHANGED, WOULD AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF THE OVERALL RATING OF RECORD.

Reconsideration Process

When an employee has a concern about the rating received on a particular element, which if changed will affect the outcome of the rating of record, they may request a reconsideration of their rating through the Bureau’s reconsideration process. The reconsideration process consists of informal and formal procedures.

Informal Reconsideration Procedures

  • Whenever possible, the employee and rating official should informally attempt to resolve any disagreement about the performance appraisal and/or rating
  • An employee must discuss their dissatisfaction with the rating official before requesting a formal reconsideration unless the employee requests in writing to move directly to the formal stage
  • Informal discussion with rating official should take place within 7 calendar days of the employee’s receipt of the EPAP.
  • The rating official’s decision on the employees request for informal reconsideration must be communicated to the employee, either verbally or in writing, within 7 calendar days of the informal reconsideration discussion
  • IF agreement cannot be reached informally, the employee may request formal reconsideration of the rating through their Human Resources Office.

Formal Reconsideration Procedures

  • Within 7 calendar days of receipt of a decision on the informal reconsideration procedures the employee can submit a written request to their Human Resources Officer
  • The employee’s written request for formal reconsideration should include:
    • Employee organization and duty station;
    • Copy of the EPAP for which reconsideration is requested;
    • Area(s) or details of the EPAP for which reconsideration is requested;
    • State why employee believes the rating is in error, with supporting facts and documents;
    • State the action requested of the reconsideration official;
    • A copy of the written decision of the informal reconsideration by the rating official, or a written statement from the employee confirming the informal process was followed and the results, or a written request by the employee to move directly to the formal procedures; and
    • If applicable, the name, title, addresses, and telephone number of the employee’s designated representative. NOTE: Representative is at the employee’s expense.
  • The HR Office will review the employee’s formal request for reconsideration to determine if it is appropriate for acceptance. If it is not accepted, the request will be returned with an explanation of the reason(s) for non-acceptance. If the request is accepted it is referred to the reconsideration official (next level supervisor) within 14 calendar days of receipt in HR.
  • Review is limited to reconsideration of rating on critical element(s) that will impact the Rating of Record.
  • The reconsideration official is responsible for the following actions in considering an employee’s formal reconsideration request:
  • Reviewing all evidence/information submitted by the employee and/or rating official;
  • Consulting with the employee, the employee’s representative (if applicable), the rating official, and staff experts as appropriate;
  • Deciding whether to increase the summary rating or an element rating; remove or modify narrative comments, or leaving the summary rating, element rating(s), or narrative comments unchanged; and
  • Within 20 calendar days of receipt of the request for reconsideration, issuing a final written decision that includes documentation of the basis for the decision. The written decision is given to the employee and copy is filed with the EPAP in the Employee Performance File (EPF).
  • The written decision of the reconsideration official is final and becomes the employee’s official rating of record.
  • Reconsideration timeframes may be extended on a case-by-case basis upon mutual consent of the employee and rating official or reconsideration official, with concurrence of the Human Resources Office.

Rating Discussion with the Employee

  • The rating official should be prepared to have a thorough performance rating discussion, including tasks that were completed well and any area(s) that need improvement. Provide the employee with specific examples.
  • Discuss the rating in a private location (private office/conference room/etc); schedule uninterrupted time to discuss the rating.
  • Allow additional time for employee input, comments and/or questions.
  • Have employee sign and date the “Employee” block on the EPAP.
  • Ensure that you are discussing performance and not misconduct.