For a complete discussion on the Appeals Mission and Organizational Structure, refer to IRM 1.1.7 Organization and Staffing, Appeals. The Vision of Appeals is to provide premier dispute resolution services that meet our customer needs through a highly skilled and satisfied workforce, utilizing innovative approaches, dynamic processes, and interpersonal skills that promote quality business results.

The Core Values of Appeals are:

Management Engagement is a concept of active, personal, directional involvement by Area Directors and Appeals Team Managers (ATMs). Focusing on directional involvement and accountability impacts positively on customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and business results. Managers are expected to motivate their employees, and establish a positive work climate where the approach is one of engagement and commitment with a focus on improvement in operational measures. The emphasis needs to be on the positive: what we can do, what we will do, and why it’s important. The expectation is that Appeals managers will:

Management engagement requires a high level of emphasis on the concept of ownership of work at each organizational level. Frequent and direct communication is critical. The expectation is that managers will communicate the organizational policies and objectives in the context of the employees’ day-to-day actions. Engagement and commitment are necessary at all management levels, to achieve continuous improvement in customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and business results. The concept of ownership of the work applies to operations and programs. The Executive and management levels address this guideline as follows:

What is ownership? The concept of ownership includes commitment to doing the best possible job and performing every act so as to consistently achieve the correct results or appropriate action. The Area Director and the ATM are the critical links between the Service’s broader goals and the operational objectives and measures. Management "ownership" requires consideration of what is important to all taxpayers, and balances operational efficiency with the achievement of high quality results. Taxpayers seeking their appeal rights are interested in resolving their dispute on a timely basis with courtesy and in receiving the "correct" application of the tax law. The rest of the taxpaying public is generally concerned with safeguarding the public trust concerning the protection and conservation of their tax dollars and rights through operational efficiency and accuracy.

A significant aspect of employee development is fostering the attitude and expectation that all employees, including managers, take personal ownership in continual development and for becoming experts in their area of responsibility. There are many internal resources available, including Skillsoft courses, IVTs, and specialized formal training. Area Directors and ATMs must plan actions to ensure all employees are availed of these resources. Informal training, such as presentations by Counsel or specialists, or assigning employees to make presentations on technical issues at team meetings, provides benefits at minimum cost. ATMs are responsible for ensuring employees can work the full range of issues at their grade level, and that they stay current and proficient as changes occur. While the nature of the receipts can present a challenge in providing sufficient variety of work, whenever feasible, employees are assigned developmental at-grade work.

Appeals managers are responsible for the control of work units from the time the unit comes into the office until it goes out of the office.

Statistical reports which are produced monthly and quarterly summarize information on receipts, disposals, inventory, overage units, etc., provide a means of controlling work on an overall basis.

Appeals Processing Services is the control center for the returns in inventory. See IRM 8.20Appeals Case Processing Manual, for instructions for maintaining a uniform records and reporting system on Appeals operations.

Workload review are the best tool available to a manager for keeping abreast of the case management practices and work habits of Appeals personnel. It is necessary to combine live case review with the workload review. Review all significant work units and a representative sample of the appeals officers' inventory.

Conduct a thorough workload review annually for each grade 14 appeals officer; conduct semi-annual workload reviews on grades 13 and below. More frequent reviews are necessary, quarterly and perhaps even monthly, where serious performance deficiencies and need for development are identified. "Factors to Consider in Grading Appeals Work Units" . See Exhibit 1.4.28-1.

Generally, the tools in conducting a workload review are the case activity record (CAR), time report, the Appeals case summary cards, a copy of the prior workload review report, if any, a discussion with the employee, and live case reviews.

The primary objective of a workload review is for you as a manager to gain a specific understanding of the status of each work unit in an employee's inventory. Properly conducted, it involves a substantial amount of time. Over the long run, however, it saves you much more time than you spend. It gives you insight into each employee's work habits, case management practices, and technical abilities, and identify areas where training and development are needed. It provides you insight as to the exact status of each employee's inventory and give you a basis for frequent but quick follow-up. Strength and weakness in performance are clearly identified with specific examples. A workload review also offers an opportunity to give specific guidance and direction with respect to specific management practices and technical abilities.

A workload review enables you to evaluate and give feedback as to how well an employee is managing inventory by appraisal of the following factors:

In addition to the above, a workload review enables you to make judgments concerning an employee's:

A workload review also offers an opportunity for:

Following a workload review, promptly give the employee your written analysis and summary. Cite specific instances of exemplary performance or weaknesses in performance. Clearly state guidance and direction. Set out any agreements between you and the employee with respect to specific action, target dates and overall performance.

The employee should acknowledge receipt of any memorandum or any other document summarizing the results of the workload review by initialing the manager's copy.

Periodically sit in on conferences of Appeals Officers and Settlement Officers for observation of his/her performance in the conference setting. Factors to observe:

Give the employee feedback with respect to the conference performance promptly afterwards, concentrating on strengths and need for improvement.

In addition to controlling work in the hands of appeals officers, settlement officers, tax specialists and account resolution specialists, managers also control work in:

Operational reviews are a major means available to ensure efficient operation of the support areas.

An important task of the reviewing secretary or other designee is to conduct a procedural review of case files before submission to the manager for technical review. Spot check the quality of the procedural review and the quality of the computation during the manager's technical review of the case file. Sometimes feedback from appeals officers gives a good clue as to whether or not the computation area is operating efficiently. Frequently, indications of how efficiently APS is processing cases is determined at the time units are assigned.

Taxpayers, their representatives, Compliance personnel, and the Service as a whole, look to Appeals to render decisions based on the facts, judicious application of Service policy, and sound legal principles.

Delegation Order No. 66 (as revised) delegates settlement authority to appeals team managers, and appeals team case leaders. This authority may not be re-delegated to appeals officers, except for limited authority in assessed penalty cases. The appeals officer's proposed settlement is only a recommendation; you have the authority and responsibility to accept or reject. You must assure yourself of the quality of the appeals officer's decision and recommendation. Accomplish this through review of the settlement memorandum and case file, prior knowledge of the case during the negotiation process, or knowledge of the appeals officer's technical expertise and quality of decisions.

Case work review provides one of the best means of evolving a day-to-day evaluation of an appeals officer or settlement officer's performance. More important, it gives you continuously updated data on strengths and weaknesses for use in training, motivating through job enrichment, and otherwise helping the employee to develop maximum potential. It provides facts to use at rating time, as opposed to impressions gained from recent sampling of work performance. When reviewing a case, be alert to areas of weakness in an employee's handling of cases, which should be corrected through discussion or further training, as well as the employee's strengths and abilities.

Recognize that the majority of issues referred to Appeals are controversial and rest upon judgment and opinion on which reasonable and honest people may hold divergent views. You, as reviewing official in striving to ensure high-quality decisions, ordinarily will not substitute personal judgment for that of the appeals officer when the decision is fairly supported by facts and applicable law. If your review shows that the appeals officer understands and correctly applies basic settlement philosophy of Appeals as set forth in IRM 8.6.,Conference and Settlement Practices , the appeals officer's conclusions resting on judgment will ordinarily be accepted. If in your judgment the proposed settlement is not supported and is inappropriate, however, or if it would result in inconsistencies, you must reject the settlement.

In a case in which there is a verbatim recording of the proceedings and a potential conference performance problem is identified, you may wish to listen to the tape(s) to determine whether counseling or training of the employee is necessary. Make disciplinary actions or evaluations of performance involving a verbatim recording of a conference in accordance with current IRS-union agreements. Consult with your labor relations specialist. You must also determine whether to have a transcript made of appropriate portions of the recording in case later access to it becomes necessary as provided for in any current union contract.

The grading of an Appeals work unit is based on the complexity and difficulty of the case. The manager considers criteria such as the degree of factual complexity and legal complexity of the issues, the impact/sensitivity of the case and the conference/negotiating skills required by the case. See Exhibit 1.4.28-1 for factors to consider.

Appeals has developed specific case grading guidance for Penalty Appeals and Innocent Spouse cases. The information is on the http://appeals.web.irs.gov/managers/managers_resource.htm . To access the case grading guidelines go to the Appeals home page and click on Managers Resources. The Collection Case Grading Matrix is incorporated in this IRM as Exhibit 1.4.28-4.

All work units involving employee plan or exempt organization issues are graded 13 unless application of the criteria in the appropriate exhibits warrant another grade.

Upon assignment or as soon as discovered, Appeals Team Managers (ATM's), refer all cases with the following issues to the appropriate Appeals Team Manager Technical Guidance (ATM-TG):

The ATCL/TL must prepare the referral whether or not any of the above issues are being considered for assignment to a team member or retained by the ATCL/TL. Coordination with the Technical Guidance Coordinator (TGC) will continue in accordance with IRM 8.7.3Technical Guidance Programs.

Refer all TEGE issues, Exempt Plans (EP), Exempt Organizations (EO), Tax Exempt Bonds (TEB) and Government Entities (GE), to the Appeals TEGE team manager in accordance with IRM 8.16Appeals TE/GE Cases. The TEGE referral procedures are obtained on the Appeals web page for TEGE.

Refer all Estate and Gift (E&G) valuation issues with tax of $10M or more to the Appraisal Services ATM-TG for consultation in accordance with IRM 8.18.1, Valuation Assistance Procedures.

As soon as possible after assignment, ATM's will forward referrals (Form 13381), as generated by ACDS, via E-mail (http://appeals.web.irs.gov/ibsp/documents/Technical_Guidance_Referral_Procedures.pdf) with any issue(s) or case assignment recommendations to the appropriate ATM-TG. (Please use "Technical Guidance Referral" in the E-mail subject line, the taxpayer's name or work unit number (wuno) on the form and encrypt the E-mail and all attached files where warranted).

Forward International referrals to the ATM-TG for their respective area using the international coverage maps for ATCL operations on the Appeals TG web page. Forward CCI, ACI, Emerging Issues and other specialist requests to the appropriate ATM-TG using the TG organization chart on the Appeals TG web page.

The receiving ATM-TG determines the level of Technical Guidance assistance to be provided based on all available facts including existing workload.

Generally within five workdays, (sooner if required), the ATM-TG makes the assignment determination.

It is the responsibility of the ATCL/AO to prepare and forward the referral (Form 13381) to Technical Guidance through their ATM. Include a comment in the case activity record documenting the referral actions taken. Referrals to Technical Guidance is monitored during the AQMS process, as warranted.

The ATM-TG returns the completed referral as an attachment via encrypted E-mail to the requesting ATM for association with the case file. At closing, the ATCL/AO attaches the referral to Form 3608, Request for Audit Work.