View Rule

The Office of Personnel Management proposed to create a new subpart in Part 430. Coverage of senior-level (SL) and scientific or professional (ST) employees (senior professionals) would be separated from regulations that cover General Schedule employees and align with recently finalized amendments made to Senior Executive Service performance appraisal regulations. The new subpart would remove the prohibition of a forced distribution of performance rating levels and would include other amendments to increase the quality and efficiency of senior professional performance appraisal. Currently, agencies are prohibited from establishing quotas or limits on the number or proportion of the various rating levels assigned, meaning that each senior professional can potentially receive any rating irrespective of how other senior professionals perform within the agency. However, governmentwide SL and ST ratings data have consistently shown that virtually all SL and ST employees receive the highest rating levels (i.e., levels 4 and 5) despite documented reports of failings. Removing the prohibition on forced distribution would allow OPM to establish and enforce limits on the highest SL and ST rating levels, thereby increasing rigor in the SL and ST appraisal process and leading to a more normalized distribution of SL and ST ratings across the Federal Government.

Statement of Need:

While many provisions applicable to senior professionals such as pay, aggregate limit on compensation, leave accrual, and leave carryover limit have evolved over the years to match what the SES receive, senior professionals have remained subject to the same general performance appraisal regulations that apply to most non-SES federal employees, including rank-and-file GS and prevailing rate employees.  The lack of appraisal rules specifically tailored to senior professionals’ important roles and high level of compensation hinders agencies’ ability to fully leverage the strategic potential of these positions.  OPM found that, despite its previous efforts to promote rigor in senior professional performance appraisal by encouraging agencies to develop more stringent performance requirements, senior professional ratings distributions come nowhere close to resembling a normal bell curve.  The distribution of these ratings suggests there is inflation of senior professional ratings and poor performing employees are likely not being identified or held accountable through a rigorous appraisal process.  As such, action must be taken to re-set and infuse rigor into the senior professional performance appraisal process. 

Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

OPM expects senior professionals to benefit from increased feedback and oversight under the proposed provisions, which require more frequent progress reviews and provide the opportunity for a higher-level review of any proposed ratings instead of a mandatory review of an Unacceptable (Level 1) rating of record; agency-level Professional Review Board oversight over recommended ratings of record, pay adjustments, and performance awards; and increased governmentwide consistency for senior professional performance appraisal.