It's that time of year again. This is where the rubber meets the road. EPAP's for FY2008 were due November 30. Obviously, most are going to be late again. Do not let them talk you into back dating any of them. If you have questions, please contact the Union President or Vice-President.

Please take the time to read the handbook and the Memorandum of Agreement that changes Article 9! It will anwer most of your questions about the critical elements. Supervisors can be graded on how well the "team" performs...however employees performance must be based on task the employee is responsible for, has control over AND can exceed. From what we are seeing, this is as much of a mess as it has EVER been. Our information request of all EPAP's for 2007 is still not filled. We do not plan on backing off.

Hopefully you followed our direction and made sure the critical elements were quantifiable and reasonable. We are still hearing of employees who have critical elements with the words "see benchmark" in all five levels. That is not what the new OPM regulations say. It states that at least the exceptional and fully successful standards will be written out. That means it should be customized to what you do. Management can write out all the levels in order to rate, but it's not required. Depending on how informed or enlightened your supervisor is, and how persuasive you are, will depend on how well written your EPAP is ready for the end of year rating. Here is a nice timeline chart - right out of the handbook.

Those of you who have critical elements that are not written out in the two levels stated above or have backdating issues, we strongly encourage you to send them in a blue envelope to:

Tim Moore Union President
20 Hamilton Ct.
Hollister, CA 95023

We have some frequently asked questions for you regarding EPAP's. Click here for the FAQ. If you have questions we haven't answered, please feel free to contact Ken Downing at kdowning@ca.blm.gov or kgdowning@yahoo.com to ask your questions.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed between the Union in 2004. The Union suggests anyone having problem with their EPAP (or their supervisor) print both the MOU AND the handbook below and read them carefully. There are a lot of "nuts and bolts" in the MOU that are specific to CA-BLM - and most Supervisor and Managers would be better served to read them as well. Educate yourself! A good defense is ALWAYS a good offense.

HOW DOES YOUR SUPERVISOR RATE?

As of FY2007, OPM has placed DOI on a Beta Site for Employee Performance Appraisals. Here is the handbook they gave all supervisors at the beginning of the year for the new appraisal system. Not many Managers or Supervisors shared this with their employees so the Union thought we should.

DOI's performance management policy is "designed to document the expectations of individual and organization performance, provide a meaningful process by which employees can be rewarded for noteworthy contributions to the organization, and provide a mechanism to improve individual/organizational performance as necessary.

To accomplish these objectives, managers need to identify organizational goals to be accomplished, communicate individual and organizational goals to employees that support the overall strategic mission goals of the Department, monitor and evaluate employee performance, and use performance as a basis for appropriate personnel actions, including rewarding noteworthy performance and taking action to improve less than successful performance."

OPM defines performance management as the systematic process of:

• planning work and setting expectations
• continually monitoring performance
• developing the capacity to perform
• periodically rating performance in a summary fashion; and
• rewarding good performance

So.....Here are the benchmark standards (right out of the handbook) for the Supervisors. Where does YOUR supervisor rank as a Supervisor?

Benchmark Supervisory Performance Standards
Exceptional:
Supervisory: The employee demonstrates excellent leadership skills and with only rare exceptions develops effective working relationships with others. The employee immediately handles difficult situations with subordinates with professionalism and effectiveness, and demonstrates foresight in correcting situations that may cause future problems before they arise. The employee encourages independence and risk-taking among subordinates, yet takes responsibility for their actions. The employee is open to and solicits the views of others, and promotes cooperation among peers and subordinates, while guiding, motivating and stimulating positive responses.
The employee demonstrates a strong commitment to fair treatment, equal opportunity and the affirmative action objectives of the organization, and has a significant positive impact on achievement of goals in this area. In addition, the employee demonstrates innovation and specific positive achievements in meeting other management obligations such as safety, internal management controls, merit systems principles, performance management, and management of ethics, conduct and discipline issues.

Superior:
Supervisory: The employee demonstrates good leadership skills and establishes sound working relationships. The employee almost always handles difficult situations with subordinates with professionalism and effectiveness. The employee shows good judgment in dealing with others and considering their views. The employee has a strong sense of mission and seeks out responsibility. The employee demonstrates a commitment to fair treatment, equal opportunity and the affirmative action objectives of the organization, and has a positive impact on achievement of goals in this area. In addition, the employee promotes a safe working environment and solutions to problems encountered in meeting other management obligations including internal management controls, merit systems obligations, managing performance, and management of ethics, conduct and discipline issues.

Fully Successful:
Supervisory: The employee is a capable leader who works successfully with others and listens to suggestions. The employee generally handles difficult situations with subordinates with professionalism and effectiveness. The employee also works well as a team member, supporting the group’s efforts and showing an ability to handle a variety of interpersonal situations. The employee’s work with others shows an understanding of the importance of fair treatment and equal opportunity and meets all management commitments related to providing a safe working environment, merit systems obligations, performance management, and internal controls, and management of ethics, conduct and discipline issues.

Minimally Successful:
Supervisory: The employee’s supervisory performance shows serious deficiencies that require correction. The employee sometimes fails to motivate subordinates and promote team spirit; provide clear assignments and performance requirements or sufficient instructions to subordinates; provide sufficient explanation of organizational goals to subordinates; satisfy customer needs and/or meet customer service objectives; and/or meet production or mission goals in a timely and quality manner. The employee’s work with others fails to show a consistent understanding of the importance of fair treatment and equal opportunity. The employee does not meet all management obligations related to internal controls, merit system obligations, performance management, and/or management of ethics, conduct and discipline issues.

Unsatisfactory:
Supervisory: The employee’s supervisory performance is unsatisfactory. The employee usually fails to motivate subordinates and promote team spirit; often provides unclear assignments and performance requirements or insufficient instructions to subordinates; frequently fails to provide sufficient explanation of organizational goals to subordinates; generally fails to satisfy customer needs and/or meet customer service objectives; and/or frequently fails to meet production or mission goals in a timely and quality manner. The employee’s work with others consistently fails to show an understanding of the importance of fair treatment and equal opportunity. Employee frequently fails to meet other management obligations related to internal controls, merit systems obligations, performance management, and/or management of ethics, conduct and discipline issues.

EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION: Supervisors/managers should encourage employees to participate in establishing the EPAP for their position. By participating, employees get a clearer understanding of what is required and what role their position plays in the activity of the organization. The final decision regarding critical elements and standards always rests with the management official, however.
Employee participation may be accomplished as follows:
(1) Employee and rating official jointly developing the EPAP;
(2) Employee providing the rating official with a draft plan;
(3) Rating official providing the employee with a draft plan, or
(4) Employee writing one of the critical elements that he/she performs in his/her position.

DOCUMENTING ELEMENTS AND STANDARDS The critical elements and associated descriptions of expected performance described at the “fully successful” level, at a minimum, must be documented on the EPAP (See Appendix 8) and signed by the rating official and the employee. Reviewing officials may be required to review/approve the EPAP as determined by their Bureau/Office.

EPAPs should be developed and put in place within 60 days of the beginning of the appraisal period, the employee’s entrance on duty, the assignment of an employee to a detail or temporary promotion scheduled to exceed 120 days, the assignment of an employee to a new position, or their assignment to a new or different supervisory position. Rating officials who move out of their position more than 90 days before the end of the rating period should finalize progress reviews and where standards had been in place for the minimum of 90 days, prepare an interim appraisal for the incoming rating official. If an employee moves to a supervisory position in the new organization, a review of the previous EPAPs should be accomplished and if accepted, both the new rating official and the employee sign and date the EPAP. If the new rating official makes changes to the plan, a new plan must be put in place, allowing the employee a minimum of 90 days under the new plan before a rating may be assigned.