HHS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 
APPRAISAL PROGRAM:  
Preparing for Final Evaluations

Prepared by the Office of Human Resources, NIH
November 2006

Overview
•	Coverage and Concepts
•	Exceptional vs. Fully Successful
•	Assignment of Employee Ratings
•	Performance Awards
•	Addressing Poor Performance
•	Pitfalls to Avoid

Coverage & Concepts
•	Modeled loosely after HHS SES Performance Program:

•	Facilitates performance distinctions
•	Links awards to performance
•	Establishes minimum appraisal period as 90 days 
•	4-tier rating system – Exceptional, Fully Successful, Minimally Successful, and Unacceptable

How do you measure performance?
Measures and 
Assessment Methods
Exceptional vs. Fully Successful
•	Exceptional – Employee surpasses expectations consistently and performs above fully successful.

•	Fully Successful – Employee completes work and meets all requirements.
Exceptional vs. Fully Successful
•	PMAP causes a cultural shift because it requires that we now view Fully Successful as the norm.

•	When Fully Successful is not viewed as the norm, ratings become less meaningful.

•	Monetary performance awards per individual become less because more people than anticipated are receiving the highest rating yet the funds available for awards remain the same.
Examples of Exceptional Performance
•	Improvements and contributions to management, administrative, technical, or other functional areas

•	Increases in office and/or individual productivity

•	Flexibility and adaptability in responding to changing priorities

•	Leadership on workgroups or teams

•	Initiation of significant collaborations and coalitions

Examples of Fully Successful Performance
•	Planned, well-organized, and complete work assignments that reflect requirements

•	Decisions or actions that demonstrate organizational awareness including knowledge of mission, function, policies, and culture

•	Strong relationships with employees and/or clients

•	Demonstration of ethics, integrity, and accountability that achieve HHS and NIH goals
Four levels possible on 
individual critical elements
An overall performance rating is arrived at by averaging the scores.

Total Points by the number of Critical Elements

•	Exceptional				4.4 to 5.0 points
•	Fully Successful			3.0 to 4.3 points
•	Minimally Successful		2.0 to 2.9 points
•	Unacceptable			1.0 to 1.9 points
Performance Awards for Summary Ratings
Addressing Poor Performers
As soon as a potential problem is identified, 
the supervisor should contact 
the Employee Relations Office.

IC Contact:  [insert here]

Addressing Poor Performers
Additional resources that are available to assist both the supervisor and employee include:

•	 Office of the Ombudsman - 301-594-7231
•	 Employee Assistance Program - 301-496-3164
•	 Work/Life Center - 301-435-1619

Pitfalls to Avoid
•	Do not focus on one specific incident - review the entire period which the appraisal covers

•	Do not go solely by memory - base the review on accurate and factual data

•	Length of service or an employee’s grade does not necessarily mean better performance.

•	Avoid bias about an employee based on your personal feelings for that individual.

Pitfalls to Avoid
•	Do not confuse current performance on past performance. Look at the current period being reviewed.

•	Do not overrate a poor performer as a motivational tool.

•	Do not rush through the appraisal. Take time to record accurate information which truly reflects the individual's performance.

•	Do not be afraid to provide truthful information.

Questions?