This checklist
is for assessing the adequacy of personnel evaluation systems.
It is organized according to the 21 Joint Committee Personnel
Evaluation Standards, plus an additional recommended standard focused
on legal viability. For each of the 22 standards the checklist
includes 6 checkpoints drawn from the substance of the standard.
It is suggested that each standard be scored on each checkpoint.
Then judgments about the adequacy of the subject evaluation in meeting
the standard can be made as follows: 0-1 Poor, 2-3 Fair, 4 Good,
5 Very Good, 6 Excellent. It is recommended that an evaluation
be failed if it scores Poor on standards P1 Service Orientation, U3
Evaluator Credibility, F4 Legal Viability, A4 Valid Measurement, or
A7 Bias Control. Users of this checklist are advised to consult
the full text of The Joint Committee (1988) Personnel Evaluation
Standards, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR PROPRIETY,
PERSONNEL EVALUATION
SYSTEMS SHOULD: |
P1 Service Orientation
- Assess whether
each service provider is delivering high quality, principled
services
- Assure that all
assessments are grounded in pertinent institutional/program
mission and goals
- Assure that all
service providers' responsibilities are clear
- Assure that all
service providers are assessed in relation to their job responsibilities
- Assure that all
service providers are assessed for their contributions to meeting
the pertinent needs of the targeted beneficiaries
- Support personnel
actions that protect the welfare of targeted beneficiaries
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
P2
Formal Evaluation Guidelines
- Be grounded in
pertinent personnel policies
- Be consistent with
the requirements of any pertinent collective bargaining agreement
- Assure that all
evaluators deliver unambiguous assessment findings
- Conform to the
pertinent legal protections of all the evaluatees’ rights
- Assure that evaluations
are consistent and equitable considering evaluations of similar
evaluatees
- Assure that all
the personnel evaluations meet all pertinent ethical standards
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
P3
Conflict of Interest
- Provide concrete
procedures for searching out potential conflicts of interest
- Include provisions
for controlling conflicts of interest at every level of examination
and judgment
- Provide for honestly
addressing conflicts of interest, including the appearance of
conflict of interest
- Engage only those
evaluators who are not subject to an unresolvable conflict of
interest
- Assure that evaluators
employ multiple data sources to examine and judge personnel
performance
- Provide for inviting
and appending each employee's reactions to the evaluation report
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
P4
Access to Personnel Evaluation Reports
- Provide for maintaining
security of the obtained information
- Provide for clearly
identifying authorized users of each evaluation report
- Provide for appropriately
restricting access to each set of obtained information
- Provide clear rules
for distributing evaluation reports
- Provide for notifying
each evaluatee of additions to her/his personnel file
- Promise only those
levels of confidentiality and anonymity that meet pertinent
law
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
P5
Interactions with Evaluatees
- Require and provide
guidelines for the evaluator to develop rapport with the evaluatee
- Require that each
evaluatee be addressed in a professional, considerate, and courteous
manner
- Instruct evaluators
to be sensitive and appropriately responsive to each evaluatee’s
needs
- Demonstrate a genuine
interest in the evaluatee as a person
- Gear evaluative
feedback to help the evaluatee strengthen performance
- Provide feedback
in a private setting
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
SCORING
THE EVALUATION FOR PROPRIETY: Add
the following:
| Number
of Excellent ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x
4 = |
____ |
| Number of Very Good
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x
3 = |
____ |
| Number of Good
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x
2 = |
____ |
| Number of Fair
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x
1 = |
____ |
|
Total Score |
|
= |
____ |
Strength of the Evaluation's
provisions for Propriety:
- 19 (95%) to 20 Excellent
- 14 (70%) to 18 Very
Good
- 10 (50%) to 13 Good
- 5 (25%) to 9 Fair
- 0 (0%) to 4 Poor
|
TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
OF UTILITY,
PERSONNEL EVALUATION
SYSTEMS SHOULD: |
U1 Constructive Orientation
- Assure that evaluatees
receive timely feedback
- Assure that evaluators
and supervisors reinforce good practice
- Assure that evaluatees
are provided direction for improvement as appropriate
- Assure that evaluatees’
needs for professional development are assessed
- Assure that evaluation
practices promote professionalism, including self-evaluation
- Assure that evaluations
help improve organizational effectiveness through evaluatees'
improved performance
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
U2
Defined Uses
- Assure that evaluations
reference and address clear evaluation purposes
- Assure that the
authorized users for each evaluation are clearly identified
- Assure that the
authorized users clearly understand the evaluation's intended
and sanctioned uses
- Assure that each
evaluation is targeted on clear and appropriate evaluation questions
- Assure that each
evaluation shows how the employed evaluative criteria fit the
evaluation questions
- Assure that evaluation
methods and information fit the evaluation questions and intended
uses
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
U3
Evaluator Credibilty
- Assure that evaluators
have the requisite training, skills, sensitivity, and authorization
- Assure that evaluators
are trained in the institution's specific evaluation policies
and procedures
- Provide clear,
public definitions of evaluators’ authority and responsibility
- Assure that all
evaluations are conducted professionally
- Clearly state that
evaluations are intended to promote and assist improvement
- Require evaluators
to justify their data, conclusions, and recommendations
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
U4
Functional Reporting
- Require and assist
evaluators to issue clear reports
- Assure that evaluation
reports, including interim reports, are issued in a timely manner
- Provide safeguards
to assure that reports are accurate
- Stress that reports
must be focused on the evaluation's purposes and the employee's
duties
- Stress that reports
should include documented strengths and weaknesses
- Provide each evaluatee
opportunities for response, appeal, and use of findings to improve
performance
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
U5
Follow-Up and Impact
- Instruct evaluators
to encourage and assist evaluatees to apply the findings
- Instruct evaluators
to help each evaluatee understand the results
- Instruct evaluators
to meet with each evaluatee to review strengths and weaknesses
- Provide ways and
means of reinforcing outstanding performance
- Provide ways and
means to help employees, as needed, develop professional growth
plans
- Provide for using
evaluation findings to terminate hopelessly incompetent or irresponsible
employees
|
SCORING
THE EVALUATION FOR UTILITY: Add
the following:
| Number
of Excellent ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x 4 = |
____ |
| Number of Very Good
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x 3 = |
____ |
| Number of Good
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x 2 = |
____ |
| Number of Fair
ratings (0-5) |
____
|
x 1 = |
____ |
|
Total Score |
|
= |
____ |
Strength of the Evaluation's
provisions for Utility:
- 19 (95%) to 20 Excellent
- 14 (70%) to 18 Very
Good
- 10 (50%) to 13 Good
- 5 (25%) to 9 Fair
- 0 (0%) to 4 Poor
|
TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR FEASIBILITY,
PERSONNEL EVALUATION
SYSTEMS SHOULD: |
F1 Practical Procedures
- Specify procedural
steps in direct and familiar language
- Employ efficient
procedures
- Require that evaluators
provide useful feedback without impeding staff performance
- Provide procedures
and constraints designed to minimize disruption to the organization
- Provide procedures
designed to minimize cost
- Instruct evaluators
to avoid collecting new information that duplicates existing
information
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
F2
Political Viability
- Provide in writing
a common focus and set of directives applicable to all of the
subject evaluatees
- Employ personnel
evaluation policies and procedures that were developed collaboratively
- Assure that the
evaluatees understand and accept the personnel evaluation policies
and procedures
- Employ personnel
evaluation policies and procedures that have the backing of
the relevant policy board
- Assure that evaluators
faithfully carry out the established personnel evaluation policies
and procedures
- Provide for appeals
and steps to rectify mistakes promptly
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
F3
Fiscal Viability
- Allocate adequate
time for assessment, reporting, and follow-up
- Allocate adequate
resources for assessment, reporting, and follow-up
- Assure that resources
are used effectively
- Assure that resources
are used frugally
- Assure that evaluation
processes are efficient in using each evaluatee’s time
- Assure that findings
are employed to help the evaluatee be more effective and efficient
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
F4
Legal Viability
- Take into account
those legal provisions that pertain to the local context
- Engage, as needed,
expert legal advice
- Adhere to the vast
body of applicable legal mandates
- Adhere to all applicable
professional standards
- Require a legally
defensible substantive due process, including definition of
role and performance standards
- Require a legally
defensible procedural due process, giving evaluatees the right
to respond and be heard
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
SCORING THE EVALUATION FOR
FEASIBILITY: Add
the following:
| Number
of Excellent ratings (0-4) |
____
|
x
4 = |
____ |
| Number of Very Good
ratings (0-4) |
____
|
x
3 = |
____ |
| Number of Good
ratings (0-4) |
____
|
x
2 = |
____ |
| Number of Fair
ratings (0-4) |
____
|
x
1 = |
____ |
|
Total Score |
|
= |
____ |
Strength of the Evaluation's
provisions for Propriety:
- 15 (94%) to 16
Excellent
- 11 (69%) to 14
Very Good
- 8 (50%) to 10 Good
- 4 (25%) to 7 Fair
- 0 (0%) to 3 Poor
|
TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR ACCURACY,
PERSONNEL EVALUATION
SYSTEMS SHOULD: |
A1 Defined Role
- Require that evaluations
reference a clearly defined role and set of responsibilities
for each evaluatee
- Require that evaluations
reference the needed qualifications for fulfilling the evaluatee’s
role
- Require that evaluations
reference clear performance objectives for each evaluatee
- Instruct evaluators
to assure that all involved parties mutually understand the
position's requirements
- Provide for deliberation
to clarify any disagreements about performance expectations
before evaluating
- Require evaluators
to employ performance indicators that validly reflect each evaluatee’s
responsibilities
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A2
Work Environment
- Provide for identifying,
describing, and recording environmental influences on job performance
- Require consideration
of the availability of needed resources when evaluating job
performance
- Require consideration
of administrative support and effectiveness when assessing job
performance
- Require consideration
of organizational climate when evaluating the incumbent's performance
- Require consideration
of the difficulties associated with serving the evaluatee’s
particular clients
- Require consideration
of relevant societal dynamics when evaluating the incumbent's
performance
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A3
Documentation of Procedures
- Require documentation
of the plan for evaluating each employee
- Require documentation
of the evaluator's qualifications
- Provide for each
evaluatee and other stakeholders to have an opportunity to evaluate
the evaluation plan
- Include regular
monitoring and recording of the evaluation process
- Require documentation
of the evidence used to reach evaluative conclusions
- Provide for showing
that due process requirements were met
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A4
Valid Measurement
- Require use of
measurement procedures based on described role and intended
use
- Require that evidence
on the validity of the measurement procedures be assembled and
made available
- Require verification
that inferences about an evaluatee are drawn from the valid
measurements
- Instruct evaluators
to include a representative sample of job tasks in the measurement
content
- Emphasize and demonstrate
that validity is the single most important issue in personnel
evaluation
- Employ the term
measurement in the broadest sense of evaluating an individual's
qualifications, performance, and/or effectiveness
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A5
Reliable Measurement
- Require procedures
that provide consistent measurements of each evaluatee’s performance
- Provide for training
and calibrating observers, raters, and other data collectors
- Require evaluators
to demonstrate consistency across different measures of the
same criterion
- Require evaluators
to demonstrate consistency across different observers of the
same behavior
- Require demonstration
of consistency across different occasions when observing a behavior
- Require documentation
of the steps followed to secure acceptable reliability
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A6
Systematic Data Control
- Provide for monitoring
and controlling the collection of information
- Provide for training
evaluation personnel in scoring, coding, data entry, and analysis
- Provide for checking
accuracy at every stage of collecting, storing, and retrieving
the information
- Provide for maintaining
security of personnel evaluation information
- Provide for careful
oversight regarding access to and retrieval of the personnel
evaluation information
- Provide for keeping
personnel evaluation data and supporting documentation confidential
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A7
Bias Control
- Recognize and provide
safeguards against the constant potential for biases in evaluations
- Require that evaluations
be based solely on criteria and information relevant to the
evaluatee’s job
- Provide for involving
evaluatees in designing, reviewing, and strengthening evaluation
plans
- Encourage collection
of information from multiple sources
- Direct evaluators
to ground conclusions in valid information
- Provide review
and appeal channels
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
A8
Monitoring Evaluation Systems
- Subject evaluation
procedures to periodic and systematic review and validation
- Professionally
investigate and appropriately follow up any complaints by evaluatees
about evaluations
- Periodically assess
evaluations against the full set of standards referenced in
this checklist
- Periodically assess
evaluations against the pertinent evaluation plans
- Periodically assess
the extent to which the personnel evaluations are achieving
their purposes
- Provide for following
up and improving the consequences of personnel evaluations
|
|
6 =
Excellent
|
5 =
Very Good |
4 =
Good |
2-3 =
Fair |
0-1 =
Poor |
SCORING THE EVALUATION FOR
ACCURACY: Add
the following:
| Number
of Excellent ratings (0-8) |
____
|
x
4 = |
____ |
| Number of Very Good
ratings (0-8) |
____
|
x
3 = |
____ |
| Number
of Good ratings (0-8) |
____
|
x
2 = |
____ |
| Number of Fair
ratings (0-8) |
____
|
x
1 = |
____ |
|
Total Score |
|
= |
____ |
Strength of the Evaluation's
provisions for Accuracy:
- 30 (94%) to 32
Excellent
- 22 (69%) to 29
Very Good
- 16 (50%) to 21
Good
- 8 (25%) to 15 Fair
- 0 (0%) to 7 Poor
|
|