FSA Performance Management Task Force Report
` October 23 – 25, 2006
Goal of the Taskforce:
Create ideas and recommendations for improvements to the FSA performance management and appraisal system
related to specific sections of the PAAT (Performance Appraisal Assessment Tool) used by OPM. This will serve as (1)
input for development of an agency plan designed to increase of overall the effectiveness and efficiency of FSA
performance management, and (2) showcase the agency as a USDA performance management beta site.
PAAT Performance System Factors
I wanted to give you a little oversight about the PAAT and what they are looking at in the way of scoring an
agency. FSA has been selected as a BETA site for 2007. Each agency is required to have one Beta site and
for USDA it is FSA. FSA and NASS are the only two agencies working with OPM concerning how to improve
performance management. FSA is looking at becoming the higher standard, not the norm, for all agencies
in USDA when it comes to Performance Management. The purpose of the beta sites is to put more focus
and attention on how well performance is managed. It also allows the agency the opportunity to test
practices and evaluate results for potential application USDA – wide. FSA was chosen because of the
result of the Performance Appraisal Assessment Score.
Why A New Performance Appraisal and Awards Process?
Internal Drivers: Decision to embark on a more comprehensive Strategic Planning Process. Decision to look at
Performance Management System
Subsequent External Drivers: Presidents Management Agenda – Results Focus
OMB Scorecard and Departmental Mandates.
The President’s Management Agenda is somewhat temporary – what is Permanent is Legislation: CHCO Act of 2002
and Implementing Policy: 5CFR250 Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework (HCAAF) which:
Provides Framework for planning & assessing human capital management
Requires a Strategic Human Capital Plan
Holds senior leaders/managers/HR officers accountable for results
Requires an annual Human Capital Accountability Report
All this adds up to is ensuring or regaining the Public Trust.
If everyone will remember that a survey was done in September, 2003 to see what employees felt about our
performance management at that time. About 7,000 employees, 45 % of our nationwide workforce completed this
survey. This survey was intended to establish a baseline for creating a higher-performance organization and to help
FSA more effectively implement the President’s Management Agenda in our mission area. From this survey, many
questions and responses was used to see where we, FSA, came in on the scoring sheet. Below are the items that were
scored and the recommendations given by the taskforce to obtain a score of 80 or more with OPM this next FY.
ALIGNMENT: Employee performance plans align with and support organizational goals. If you will reference the
point distribution chart – we scored in FY05 a 5; in FY06 we scored an 8 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self
assessment. We are not far off making this goal but our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Put performance plans (w/o ratings or names attached) on the web to make them available to FSA employees.
- At the beginning of each rating year create communication to the field, from both National Office (DAFO) and
HRD, that shows examples of alignment to agency goals starting with senior leadership performance plans and
cascading down through performance plans of the county office staffs.
- Use audit process to spot check performance plans for alignment to agency goals.
- Post “best practices” examples to spot check performance plans for alignment to agency goals.
- Clarify and simplify Agency Policy Statement re: Performance Management. Get specific examples about where
the current policy statement is most confusing and could be improved.
- Communicate consistent messages about FSA performance management throughout all levels of the FSA
organization. Emphasize that we’re all in this together and that we’re doing this because it will improve the
effectiveness of the agency – that we’re not just responding to mandates.
- Write individual performance plans for workforce – avoid cookie cutter approach. Allow employees at every level
to give input to the plan about what they can accomplish in support of the agency goals. Make adjustments
throughout the year as necessary.
- Try letting the employee write performance standards/measures that show how generic elements and standards
relate to their specific positions and align with agency/program goals.
- Hold supervisors/managers accountable for managing performance, ensuring alignment, establishing
performance expectations and measures, holding performance discussions, monitoring performance throughout
the year, etc. For example: Suggest that reviewers conduct a random sampling of telephone calls to get
feedback from raters’ staff members about the degree to which raters involved employees in developing
performance plans, held performance discussions, etc.
- Start the process for changing how we manage performance at FSA. May need to take baby steps at first – but
eventually we’ll build the choir.
- SED performance plan out to the field a month before plans are due – out by end of September – so we can see
what goals we at the county office level would align to.
RESULTS-FOCUSED
Employee performance plans need to offer a result focused outcome. If you will reference the point distribution chart –
we scored in FY05 a 1, in FY06 we scored a 6 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We are not far off
making this goal however, our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Create a measure that “you” the manger, can reasonably track.
- Need a practical application for the measure as managers don’t have time to track “extra” things, e.g., the
number of rings before an employee answers the phone.
- Measure by exception, e.g., not missing deadlines or a certain number of deadlines, “not more than…”
- Incorporate employee engagement re: performance results and self-reports of accomplishments, give
supervisors input.
- Develop a checklist (for programs) and necessary cross-training so everyone knows what’s expected, what the
standards are for a given program.
- Provide training for supervisors (and employees) on how to write outcome based standards that are measurable.
- Incorporate an allowance/methodology for modifying a standard in response to shifting priorities
- Measures need to be written to be meaningful and specific – and broken into functions so that the employee can
answer the question, “What does this mean for me?”
- Post “best practices” examples of results oriented performance elements and standards from throughout the FSA
organization (both field and HQ’s)
- Incorporate/connect with incentives.
- Agency should pick some priorities about what needs to be done.
- Know that you can modify the performance measures.
- Results need to be equitable, to create a level playing field
- Build in flexibilities, safeguards for issues/situations beyond the control of the employee/manager.
- Write elements and standards so that there are uniform expectations for similar positions in the
organization/unit/etc.
- Write individual performance plans for workforce.
- Try letting the employee write performance standards/measures that show how their specific positions and jobs
align with agency/program goals.
BALANCE AND CREDIBLE MEASURES – INCLUDING CUSTOMER AND EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE:
Employee performance plans need to offer balance and credible measures for customers as well as employees. If you
will reference the point distribution chart – we scored in FY05 a 0, in FY06 we scored a 3 using the PAAT as a tool to
do a self assessment. We are not far off making this goal however, our recommendations were as follows:
What does it mean to get the customers prospective?
For field offices it’s not new to gather customer input – it is more new for HQ staff
Include the customer service element
Address the quality aspect of work: Is work returned by customers for revisions,
Is it accepted/approved when submitted.
Recommendations:
- Have the guidance be understandable, e.g., no validated customer complaints
- Dialogue with customers (informal or formal)
- Measure the number of valid complaints
- Make observations on customer interactions
- Set the tone for receiving input/feedback from customers
- Use survey resources that are available, i. e., the Gallup Q12
What does it mean to get the employee’s perspective?
It’s 360’ish in nature
Possible measures include, retention rate – looking at who is staying, who is moving, where they are going and why
(promotion or professional development opportunities vs. transfer to new leadership); number of individual development
plans; number of employees nominated for awards/held accountable for performance.
Recommendations:
- Focus on creating the climate for open feedback
- Have all employees take the supervisor training so that they understand what is involved in the performance
measurement process.
- Issue a timely PM notice about the expectation.
- Send an email about the new notice – with a clear subject title.
- Consolidate PM notices and store in one central location for easy reference.
- Include a lot of examples on how to get employee and customer information and feedback; provide guidance on
effective strategies that can be implemented at various levels.
- Let employees know that the reviewer will be asking for information.
- Communicate why the reviewer is conducting a survey, how the results link to alignment performance.
- How do managers use some of the training opportunities available – such as AgLearn.
DISTINCTIONS IN LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE
Employee performance plans need to offer distinctions in levels of performance. If you will reference the point
distribution chart – we scored in FY05 a 0, in FY06 we scored a 2 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment.
We are not far off making this goal however, our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Develop a range for “fully successful” – exceeding that range exceeds performance; falling short of the range
demonstrates unacceptable performance.
- Be cautious of using percentages for ratings – it is difficult to prove if a manager can’t account for the 100% - use
exceptions instead
- Clearly communicate changes to the system whey they occur, and link the change to what the previous PM
stated.
For dealing with misconceptions in the field around distinctions in levels of performance.
- Address the rumors around quotas related to performance levels
- Clarify expectations of supervisors when justifying performance beyond fully successful.
- Clarify that ratings are not related to budget issues
- The perception in this current rating cycle is that no one can exceed fully successful because the system was
only in place for 90-days.
CONSEQUENCES BASED ON PERFORMANCE – AWARDS
Employee performance plans need consequences based on performance - awards. If you will reference the point
distribution chart – we scored in FY05 a 0, in FY06 we scored a 2 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment.
We are not far off making this goal however, our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Major recommendation:
- Establish a Sub-Committee to develop and recommend a new FSA “Incentive Awards” policy
- Sub-Committee should review recommendations made by former Performance Management Task force (2003-
2005) as a starting point
- Create “open and transparent” incentive awards system
- Hold supervisors accountable for managing their awards program/budget
- A strong message from FSA leadership that sets expectations for managers to manage performance. This
message needs to be delivered through more than emails to employees.
- Training for both managers and employees about addressing performance problems. Stress that addressing
performance problems as they occur prevent more difficult situations in the future and free time for managers to
concentrate more on star performers.
- Actually taking a performance-based action would send a symbolic message throughout the agency that there
are consequences for poor performances.
EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT
Employee performance plans need to offer employee involvement. If you will reference the point distribution chart – we
scored in FY05 a 4, in FY06 we scored an 8 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We are not far off
making this goal however, our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Expand the menu of performance measures from which field office employees may select/modify – provides more
incentive for becoming involved in developing performance plans because employees would see measures more
related to what they actually do. Include best practice examples.
- Training that reinforces and better explains appraisal program flexibilities that give supervisors, together with
employees, the opportunity to modify measures on existing menus and / or create new measures.
- Offer the Agleam supervisory performance management training to all employees – publicize the opportunity.
- Reinforce – through training and other means – the requirement for/importance of conducting discussions with
employees at the beginning of the rating year to develop/review performance elements and standards and
ensure that performance expectations are fully understood. These discussions should also create clear
performance measures, even though this is not required in writing. Supervisors/Managers need to have thought
this through when setting the initial performance expectations.
- Consider creating performance contracts with employees
- Train Supervisors/Managers in the most effective ways to hold performance discussions, from setting
expectations, to giving performance feedback throughout the rating year, to giving final end-of-year ratings. Use
role play demonstrations.
- Consider getting rid of the generic agency-wide elements and standards – they make it more difficult to fit specific
job-related measures under them. Instead, allow managers/supervisors, together with employees, to create
elements and standards that are more reflective of what they do.
- Recognize that having a meaningful FSA process may provide incentive for employee involvement in setting
elements and standards/measures.
FEEDBACK:
Employee performance plans need feedback given. If you will reference the point distribution chart – we scored in
FY05 a 2, in FY06 we scored a 6 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We need to improve in this area,
our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
- Make it part of the performance measure (it is included but may need to be more specific.
- Model the behavior by higher-level supervisors.
- Demonstrate how a mid-year review could / should occur in a role-play video.
- Need to explain all of this – go through with every supervisor and every employee so that they know what they
are responsible for and let them know that they will be audited on.
- Accountability – take samples of plans, follow up on whether people are doing what’s required.
- Educate people what is required and that this is a year-round process.
- Feedback isn’t always formal – it’s sitting down and talking about a project, progress along the way, applause
and redirection.
TRAINING
Employee performance plans need training given. If you will reference the point distribution chart – we scored in FY05
a 2, in FY06 we scored a 6 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We are improving in this area but need
to continue, our recommendations were as follows:
Recommendations:
Training should address the following topics for supervisory training:
- Understand the new performance management system.
- Awards
- How to write measurable standards and how to track the measures.
- How everything relates back to goals.
- Planned development.
- Send a half-hour video from Teresa Lasseter to demonstrate how this is a priority at all levels.
Training – topics to cover in employee training
- Where have we been, where are we going, why?
- Need them to understand how the standards and elements relate to goals.
- Need them to understand how the standards and elements relate to goals.
- Process and how this relates to you: You could probably take the supervisor’s course and modify it for
employees.
- Need transparency – employees don’t always understand what supervisor’s responsibilities are.
- How to track and report on personal accomplishments related to performance measures.
ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT AND GUIDANCE
Employee performance plans needs organizational assessment and guidance. If you will reference the point distribution
chart – we scored in FY05 a 4, in FY06 we scored a 5 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We are
improving in this area but need to continue, our recommendations were as follows: These recommendations are what
was included in the Improvement Plan that was drafted for FSA. The plan is currently working its way through the
approval process to what you see are recommendations vs. the approved strategies. However, that’s the case with
everything developed – hopefully all will approved. Didn’t receive the taskforce recommendations on this part.
Assesses organizational unit performance FSA currently assesses overall program performance through OMB-
mandated Annual Performance Plan and PART reviews. Performance is typically communicated to program offices
versus individual organizational units. A key issue is communicating performance results throughout the organization
and not just the program offices. FSA will develop a plan for communicating result (see Assessment results
communicated…..”below)
Efforts will be coordinated with the Strategic Planning Office and the Budget Office.
Describe methodology for assessment We recognize that rating officials need to accurately assess individual
performance, while at the same time considering the work unit’s performance as a whole. For this reason,
communicating agency program performance results take on increasing important. The plan to ensuring this happens
will be developed by the Task Force described below.
Assessment results communicated to employees FSA will convene a cross-agency Task Force to recommend a
process/plan for communicating organizational progress throughout the organization.
Guidance provided to rating officials Guidance to rating officials will be developed based on Task Force
recommendations.
Describe guidance To be determined
Survey results While FSA scored relatively well in this area on the 2004 Federal Human Capital Survey, we believe
that our scores will improve significantly based on the communications strategy we will develop.
OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY:
Employee performance plans needs oversight and accountability. If you will reference the point distribution chart – we
scored in FY05 a 3, in FY06 we scored a 3 using the PAAT as a tool to do a self assessment. We are improving in this
area but need to continue, our recommendations were as follows: These recommendations are what was included in
the Improvement Plan that was drafted for FSA. The plan is currently working its way through the approval process to
what you see are recommendations vs. the approved strategies. However, that’s the case with everything developed –
hopefully all will approved.
Supervisors held accountable for the performance management of subordinates The current FSA Performance
Management Policy requires a critical element for a supervisor that holds them responsible for performance
management. The performance measures describe for which they are responsible.
All Supervisors have this requirement in their plan.
FSA will develop a tracking system to track overdue performance appraisals at the end of the rating year.
Program approved by agency head or designee The FSA Administrator has approved the FSA Performance
Management Program. The Agency Administrator will also approve subsequent changes.
Official with oversight The FSA Official with program oversight is the Deputy Administrator for Management. The
updated FY07 Performance Management Policy will reflect this.
Program previously evaluated The program was evaluated in September 2005 using OPM’s Performance Appraisal
Assessment Tool and changes to the program were made and continue to be made as a result.
Rating distribution reflects organizational performance Response to this question is dependent on
recommendations by the Task Force described in the previous section.
Recommendations from Task Force – Supervisor Accountability:
- Include the supervisory element in supervisors’ performance plans
- Gather information on performance through informal conversations with the individual and with his/her employees
- Rate appropriately
- Measure how they are holding their employees accountable – are they awarding the stars and working with poor
performers?
- Explore implementing a 360 review at some point While an official 360 may be in the long run, it is still possible
to gather feedback from different levels of people: employees, peers, customers and management.
- Tie in specific consequences to performance – for example if there were priorities set and there is no movement
towards those priorities, there are consequences.
- Illustrate/demonstrate from the top down the messaging from the agency leadership about accountability for
employees and supervisors, set the tone, model the behavior, and back it up with actions.
- Write and implement measurable metrics – understand that within program accountability there may be external
drivers negatively impacting results.
RESULTS:
SECTION Points Possible Points Given Current Status Sure Things *
Program Alignment 10 5 8 2
Results Focused 10 1 6 2
Balanced Creditable Measures 10 0 3 2
Distinctions In Levels of Perf. 10 0 2 3
Awards Consequences 10 0 2
Employee Involvement 10 4 8 Depends on survey
Feedback 10 3 4 6
Training 10 2 6
Org Assessment & Guidance 10 3 3 3
Oversight & Accountability 10 3 3 2
Total 100 21 45 20
45+20= 65
* “Sure Things” described in more detail on next page
SECTION WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE POSSIBLE PTS
Alignment - Develop verification/audit policy (6bi); ensure policy/program requires alignment (6b) 2
Results Focused - Review should be included in overall audit/verification policy (7bi); include better samples of aligned
plans 2
Balanced Creditable Measures - Provide examples that show obvious alignment (8a); track employees plans with
measures for baseline (8b) 2
Distinctions in Levels of Perf - Evaluate rating distributions for this past rating cycle – will serve as baseline to measure
change (9a) 3
Feedback - Develop tracking system (12c); track progress reviews (12b) 6
Assessment & Guidance - Describe methodology for assessment (14a); develop guidance for rating officials (14b);
describe guidance (14bi) 3
Oversight and Accountability - Identify oversight official (note: may already be in new guidance) (15c) 2
Total Sure Things 20
In Progress or Need Task Force Input to Get these Additional Points
Section What Needs to Be Done Possible Pts.
Balanced Credible Measures - Requirement that supervisors plans include measures from customer and employee
perspectives – make sure its in policy guidance; will be included in updates to the current CBI course; track supervisor
plans that measure customer and employee perspectives; provide good audit examples; track employees plans that
include measures 5
Distinctions in Levels of Performance - Need Task Force Input An maybe squeeze out 1-2 more points
Consequences - Need Task Force Input 2
Training - May Need Task Force Input 4
Org. Assessment & Guidance- May Need Task Force Input 1
Oversight and accountability - Need Task Force Input – program previously evaluated? 4
TOTAL POINTS 18
45 Current Assessment
20 Sure Things
18 Need Input for Strategy Development
83 Need to find 2 more points
This ends my report, which I realize is lengthy, but I want you to see what was presented to us and the
recommendations that we came up with. It was a lot to absorb and hash out and as you can see it was a very detailed
three day meeting. I want to thank NASE for the opportunity to represent them concerning this most
important and pressing issue. We will continue to have teleconferences, as well as, another meeting possibly next
summer in Washington to see how the recommendations were taken and how the process is working and receive final
findings. I want to thank all of those who served on the taskforce with me for their professionalism, honesty and the
want to - to do - the right thing!!! Let’s all be mindful of doing our part in making FSA a performance management
guru and the most cost effective, as well as, the best agency within USDA at serving our customers!!!
Respectfully Submitted,
Debbie Hammers
NASE Representative - Performance Management Taskforce