BOP Program Statement 3000.03 § 23

Performance. When the reviewing official approves and issues an

unacceptable performance rating, the reviewing official will also

issue a notice of proposed action in accordance with the

following procedures:

a. An employee who receives an unacceptable rating may be

reassigned.

b. A non-probationary employee whose reduction in grade or

removal is proposed is entitled to:

(1) Thirty calendar days advance written notice which

specifies the action proposed, the specific instances

of unacceptable performance on which the proposed

action is based and the elements involved in each

instance of unacceptable performance. These instances

must have occurred within one year prior to the notice

of proposed action;

(2) The right to be represented by an attorney or other

representative;

(3) Fifteen calendar days to respond orally and/or in

writing to the deciding official. The response time

may be extended for a specified time as determined by

the deciding official, but not for more than an

additional thirty days; and

(4) A final written decision within 30 days after the

expiration of the 30-day advance notice period. The

written decision must specify the instances of

unacceptable performance upon which the action is based

and may include any instances of unacceptable

performance which occurred during the one-year period

prior to the issuance of the advance notice. An action

may be based solely on instances of unacceptable

performance occurring during the opportunity period or

may be based on instances of unacceptable performance

occurring before, during and after the opportunity

period, as long as the instances took place during the

one-year period preceding the issuance of the notice of

proposed action. Although the agency is allowed to use

instances of pre-opportunity period performance to

support an action (though not exclusively), there is no

incentive to do so unless the agency wishes to cite

such instances as support for its overall performance

determination. The final decision must also include

notice of the employee's right to appeal the action to

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 19

the Merit Systems Protection Board or to file a

grievance under the negotiated grievance procedure (but

not both), the time limits for filing an appeal or

grievance, a copy of the MSPB appeal form and a copy

(or access to a copy) of the MSPB regulations.

430.2 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM FOR NON-BARGAINING UNIT

EMPLOYEES

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE. The objectives of the performance

evaluation program are to help improve performance, strengthen

supervisor-employee relationships and communications, identify

* and inform employees of organizational objectives, work *

requirements and standards, recognize employee accomplishments

and good work, identify and correct work deficiencies, and guide

personnel actions such as within-grade and quality step

increases, promotions, demotions, removals, reassignments,

performance awards, and training.

2. DIRECTIVES AFFECTED

Directives Referenced

* a. P.S. 3451.04 Awards Program, Incentive Awards, Bureau of

Prisons (07/10/01)

b. DOJ Human Capital Objectives and Strategic Plan.

c. 5 CFR 293, 430, 451, 531, 532 and 771. *

d. 5 U.S.C., Chapters 43 and 45

3. TOPICS COVERED

Purpose – Paragraph 1

References – Paragraph 2

Coverage – Paragraph 4

Effective Date – Paragraph 5

Responsibilities – Paragraph 6

Basic Program Requirements – Paragraph 7

Rating Period – Paragraph 8

Job Elements and Performance Standards – Paragraph 9

Issuing Performance Standards – Paragraph 10

Monitoring Performance - Performance Log – Paragraph 11

Progress Review – Paragraph 12

Final Rating – Paragraph 13

Final Discussion – Paragraph 14

Filing and Disposition of Performance Logs and Rating Forms

– Paragraph 15

Probationary Employees – Paragraph 16

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 20

Informing Supervisors and Employees – Paragraph 17

Performance Rating appeals – Paragraph 18

Relationship to Within-Grade-Increases – Paragraph 19

Quality Step Increases and Performance Awards – Paragraph 20

Addressing Deficient Performance – Paragraph 21

Minimally Satisfactory Performance – Paragraph 22

Unacceptable Performance – Paragraph 23

Proposing and Taking Action Based on Unacceptable

Performance – Paragraph 24

4. COVERAGE. This section applies to all, non-bargaining unit

employees, except the following:

* a. Employees serving under excepted appointments of less than

120 calendar days, *

b. Persons providing services on a contract basis,

c. Attorneys classified in the GS-905 series and Law Clerks

classified in the GS-904 series,

d. Employees in the Senior Executive Service, and

* e. Any other employees specifically excluded by statute.

5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date is October 31, 2004. Any

administrative action initiated prior to this Change Notice

(e.g., an action taken against an employee for unacceptable

performance under 5 U.S.C. 4303) and any ratings deferred under

the previous appraisal program shall continue to be processed in

accordance with the regulations contained in that program. *

6. RESPONSIBILITIES

a. The Assistant Director, Human Resource Management Division,

is responsible for the overall administration of this program.

b. The Federal Bureau of Prisons Personnel Director is

responsible for ensuring that the performance evaluation program

is carried out throughout the system in compliance with current

laws and regulations.

c. Chief Executive Officers are responsible for ensuring that

there is an effective performance evaluation program at their

level of the organization.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 21

d. The Approving Official for outstanding performance ratings

varies with the organizational level of the employee being rated.

(1) Institution Chief Executive Officers are the approving

officials for Bureau of Prisons and UNICOR employees at

and below the assistant department head level.

(2) Regional Directors are the approving officials for

institution employees above the assistant department

head level and regional office employees below the

Deputy Regional Director. This does not preclude input

by the appropriate Assistant Director.

(3) Assistant Directors are the approving officials for

Central Office employees except for those employees for

whom the Director is the reviewing official. Assistant

Directors are the approving officials for managerial

employees for whom the Regional Directors are the

reviewing officials.

e. The Reviewing Official is the next supervisor above the

rating official and is responsible for assigning an overall

rating and approving or adjusting individual element ratings.

Reviewing officials also approve elements and standards for their

subordinate staff and are responsible for monitoring the

performance appraisal practices of subordinate supervisors and

providing advice or instruction as needed. Reviewing officials

ensure that recommendations for incentive awards based on

performance ratings are consistent with policy and determine

whether recommendations for outstanding performance ratings will

be forwarded to the approving official.

Regional Directors are the reviewing officials for Associate

Wardens (Industries, Education and Training) and Superintendents

of Industries, with input from the Assistant Director,

Industries, Education and Training Division.

f. The Rating Official is the first level of management having

the full range of supervisory responsibilities, including

recommending performance awards. Rating officials are

responsible for maintaining the employee's performance log,

conducting progress reviews and completing the annual performance

rating in accordance with the procedures in this section.

Regional Administrators may suggest to rating officials

significant incidents for inclusion in the performance log that

relate to the quality of professional services provided. These

suggestions may be particularly useful for departments in

specialized program areas.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 22

Institution Chief Executive Officers are the rating officials

for Associate Wardens (I&E) and Superintendents of UNICOR. UNICOR

Division Managers may suggest to the CEO significant incidents

for inclusion in the performance log that relate to UNICOR

corporate goals and policies.

g. Employees are responsible for becoming familiar with the

objectives and procedures of the performance evaluation program

and for understanding the elements and performance standards for

their positions. The employee is responsible for seeking

clarification from the supervisor on any performance standard or

any other aspect of this program which is not clear. The

employee should inform the supervisor of any factors or

circumstances which the employee believes should be considered in

evaluating his/her performance.

h. Human Resource Managers are responsible for providing

training, advice, and assistance to employees and supervisors on

this program. They are also responsible for maintaining adequate

supplies of the rating forms and performance standards for

distribution to supervisors.

I. Local Procedures. Specific procedures and responsibilities

for initiating the issuance of performance standards, monitoring

changes in performance standards and rating periods, maintaining

rating forms during the rating period, recommending training and

incentive awards based on performance ratings, and other aspects

of this program not described in this section are left to the

discretion of the local Chief Executive Officer. Institutions

and offices should develop written procedures to ensure that the

requirements of this program are fully implemented.

7. BASIC PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS. The basic structure of the

performance evaluation program is outlined below and is described

in detail in subsequent sections.

a. At the beginning of the rating period, the rating official

gives the employee a copy of the performance standards for their

position and discusses them. Both the employee and rating

official sign the rating form, indicating that the discussion has

taken place.

b. Throughout the rating period, the rating official makes

entries in the employee's performance log. Each element of the

performance standards must be addressed at least once each

quarter. The rating official discusses each entry in the

performance log with the employee as it is made. Entries in the

performance log serve as the basis for the progress review and

final rating.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 23

c. Halfway through the rating period, the rating official

completes a written progress review and discusses it with the

employee. Both the employee and rating official sign the

progress review section of the rating form.

d. At the end of the rating period, the rating official

evaluates each element of the performance standards, assigns an

adjective rating to each element and forwards the rating to the

reviewing official. The reviewing official approves or adjusts

the individual element ratings, assigns an overall rating (and

forwards the rating to the approving official in the case of

outstanding ratings), and returns the rating to the rating

official for discussion with and signature by the employee.

Except in unusual circumstances, employees must receive their

performance rating within three weeks after the end of the rating

period.

* e. The performance appraisal program allows for rating

individual elements, as well as overall performance, at one of

five levels, utilizing pattern H (5 CFR 430.208) which reflects

ratings at level 5 (outstanding), level 4 (excellent), level 3

(successful), level 2 (minimally satisfactory), and level 1

(unacceptable). *

f. An employee must have worked under a set of performance

standards for a minimum of 90 days before receiving a rating

based on those standards. A rating official must have supervised

an employee for a minimum of 90 days before he or she can rate

the employee. These 90-day requirements apply only to final

ratings, not to progress reviews. There is no minimum time

requirement before a reviewing official can review a rating.

* 8. RATING PERIOD. The rating period for employees begins on

April 1 each year and ends March 31 the following year. Except

as specified in Paragraph 10b, the rating period may be adjusted*

as follows:

a. If an employee changes positions which results in a change

of performance standards, the rating period begins on the date of

the change and ends on March 31, or 90 days after the date of the

change, whichever is later.

b. If an employee changes supervisors, the rating period does

not end until he/she has been under the same supervisor for at

least 90 days.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 24

c. If a rating period is extended past March 31 in order to

meet one or both of the conditions described above, then the

employee's next rating period starts on the day after the above

conditions are met and ends on March 31 the following year.

9. JOB ELEMENTS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

a. Common job elements and performance standards have been

developed for all occupations within the Bureau of Prisons.

* These clearly state Bureau Human Capital Objectives and tie in

with organizational goals and desired results. Central Office

will reissue elements and standards when necessary, to reflect

changes in organizational objectives. Elements and standards *

are issued on pre-printed forms, making it unnecessary to type

the elements and standards on the rating form. Rating officials

must review these standards and delete any element which is

clearly not applicable to a particular position. Rating

officials may also develop one additional element with standards

and tasks to meet unique or unusual responsibilities for a

particular position; however, since all job elements are

critical, these responsibilities must be substantial and highly

important to the position. If such an element or standard is

developed, it must be reviewed and approved for use by the Bureau

Personnel Director. Once an element and standard are approved

for use, they will be typed on the

* preprinted elements and standards which apply to that position.

The Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General may issue

mandatory elements which components must include in employee’s

performance elements and standards. *

b. A job element is an aspect of the position consisting of

one or more duties or responsibilities which is sufficiently

important that inadequate performance of the element would result

in unacceptable performance in the position. All job elements

are critical.

c. A performance standard is a statement of the expectations

or requirements established by management for an element at a

particular rating level. A performance standard may include

factors such as quality, quantity, timeliness, and manner of

performance.

d. Tasks are examples of job duties that are representative of

a job element under the performance standards. Not all tasks

described under an element are applicable to all occupations

covered by that performance standard. The tasks described in the

performance standards are examples of typical duties which would

be performed in that job element.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 25

e. The performance appraisal program allows for rating

individual elements, as well as overall performance, at one of

five levels. The performance standards and tasks are described

at only three levels. Rating officials may infer performance at

one of the levels not described by comparing the employee's

actual performance to the levels which are described. For

example, if an employee's performance is better than the examples

*given for the "successful" level, but does not meet the*

examples given for the "outstanding" level, the employee's

performance should be rated at the "excellent" level.

10. ISSUING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

a. At the beginning of the rating period, the rating official

will discuss the elements, standards, and tasks for the position

with the employee. This discussion should take place as soon as

possible after the start of the rating period, normally within 30

days. The rating official and employee will sign and date the

rating form, certifying that the elements and standards are

understood. If a new element and standards are added during the

rating period (or if an element is deleted), the rating official

and employee will again discuss them and sign and date the rating

form. If the rating official changes during the rating period

but there is no change in performance elements and standards, it

is not necessary for the new rating official to review the

standards with the employee or sign the rating form; however,

rating officials are always responsible for discussing

performance standards and responding to employees' requests for

clarification of the standards.

* b. An interim rating is required when an employee is

transferred or reassigned to the same type of work after having

completed the minimum rating period. The interim rating is to be

considered in deriving the rating of record. *

c. If an employee is detailed or temporarily promoted to

another position in the Bureau of Prisons and the assignment is

* expected to last at least 120 days, the employee will be given*

the performance standards for the temporary assignment within 30

days of beginning the detail or temporary promotion. An interim

rating will be prepared at the end of the detail or temporary

promotion and the weight given to this interim rating will be

proportional to its share of the total appraisal period.

If an employee is detailed outside the Bureau, reasonable

efforts will be made to obtain appraisal information from the

outside organization which shall be considered in arriving at the

employee's rating of record. If the employee has served in the

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 26

Bureau for the minimum time period (90 days) during the rating

period, the employee must be rated. The rating will take into

account appraisal information obtained from the borrowing

organization. If the employee has not served in the Bureau for

the minimum time period, but has served the minimum time period

in the outside organization: (1) reasonable efforts will be made

to prepare a rating based on the appraisal information from the

borrowing organization or (2)the rating will be deferred until

the employee is able to serve the minimum time period in the

Bureau or the borrowing organization is able to provide appraisal

information.

If an employee transfers to the Bureau from another agency, any

summary ratings which are forwarded from the former agency and

which cover the same time period as the Bureau's rating period

will be considered in arriving at the employee's rating of

record. The weight given to a rating from a former agency will

be proportional to the share of the rating cycle covered by it.

d. The final rating most recently rendered by the former

agency will be the employee's current rating of record until it

is superseded by a final rating issued by the Bureau.

11. MONITORING PERFORMANCE - PERFORMANCE LOG. The performance

appraisal process requires that rating officials observe and note

employee performance continuously throughout the rating period.

Rating officials must record examples of employee performance to

ensure that the rating at the end of the rating period is an

accurate and fair appraisal of the employee's performance during

the whole rating period. The performance log is used to document

and substantiate the final rating.

a. Format. Attachment 4-2 is a sample performance log,

however, any form the rating official finds useful, including 5 x

8 cards, is acceptable.

b. Time Requirements. The rating official must record

performance incidents in the log so that each element is

addressed at least once each quarter. If no significantly

positive or negative performance is noted for a particular

element during a quarter, the rating official will make an entry

describing typical performance over the course of the quarter.

Rather than waiting until the end of the quarter, rating

officials must make entries in the log as the performance is

noted in order to meet the following time requirements.

Rating officials must record specific incidents in the

performance log within fifteen working days of becoming aware of

the incident.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 27

After an entry has been made in the performance log, the

employee will be given an opportunity to see the entry as soon as

practicable and before the entry is used officially, but no later

than fifteen working days after the entry is made. The employee

will be asked to initial the entry, indicating only that the

entry was discussed, not necessarily that they agree with it.

These time requirements may be adjusted, if necessary, because

of the rating official's or employee's absence.

c. Content of Performance Log Entries. Performance log

entries will document instances of important or significant job-related performance, both positive and negative. Log entries

must document the actual behavior of the employee, not

personality traits or judgmental conclusions drawn by the

supervisor. Instances of performance recorded in the log must be

related to one or more elements of the employee's performance

standards and include, at a minimum:

(1) the date of the performance incident,

(2) what the employee did that was particularly effective

or ineffective,

(3) circumstances surrounding or contributing to the

performance incident such as the consequences of the

performance, whether the employee had sufficient time

and resources or whether circumstances outside the

employee's control contributed to the performance,

(4) level of performance assigned.

d. Multiple Supervision. If an employee is supervised by more

than one supervisor during the rating period, those supervisors

are responsible for providing the rating official with any

comments or incidents for consideration for inclusion in the

performance log. This provision does not apply to employees who

* receive an interim rating in accordance with paragraph 10 of this

section. *

e. Documenting Unacceptable Performance. Instances of

unacceptable performance recorded in the performance log require

additional actions by the supervisor. Refer to Paragraph 23 of

this section for information on addressing unacceptable

performance.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 28

12. PROGRESS REVIEW. In addition to the frequent informal

discussions of performance resulting from performance log

entries, the rating official will conduct at least one formal

progress review during the rating period.

a. One progress review is required for non-probationary

employees and it will be conducted at the halfway point of the

rating period.

b. Three progress reviews are required for probationary

employees and they will be conducted at the end of the third,

sixth and ninth months of the probationary year.

c. The rating official will make narrative comments for each

job element in the progress review section of the performance

appraisal form. No adjective rating is assigned to the elements

at this time. The rating official will discuss the progress

review with the employee and both will sign the form at the

bottom of the progress review section. There is no provision or

requirement for the reviewing official to review or comment on

the progress review, however, reviewing officials may examine the

progress reviews prepared by their subordinate supervisors.

d. Progress reviews and the annual rating for probationary

employees require two performance appraisal forms. One form is

used to record the 3-month and 6-month progress reviews and a

second form is used for the 9-month progress review and annual

rating. Rating officials must ensure that a probationary

employee signs the top of both forms, indicating their

understanding of their performance standards and that they sign

the bottom of the form upon completion of each of the progress

reviews and the annual rating. The rating official does not

assign adjective ratings for any of the probationer's progress

reviews; adjective ratings are assigned to the elements only for

the final rating at the end of the probationary period.

Likewise, there is no provision or requirement for the reviewing

official to review or comment on the 3-month, 6-month or 9-month

progress reviews of probationary employees, however, rating

officials may examine the progress reviews prepared by their

subordinate supervisors. The reviewing official assigns the

overall rating and makes narrative comments on the final annual

rating of a probationary employee.

13. FINAL RATING

a. Determining Element Ratings

(1) The rating of an employee's performance in each job

element is based upon the incidents recorded in the

performance log.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 29

(2) Each element will be rated at one of five levels:

* Unacceptable, Minimally Satisfactory, Successful, *

Excellent or Outstanding.

(3) Each element will be rated at the level which reflects

the level assigned to the majority of performance log

entries for that element. If there are an equal number

of performance log entries at two different levels, the

rating official may assign either of the two levels

unless there is an intermediate level or levels. For

*example, if two log entries are "successful" and two*

are "excellent," the rater may assign either

*"successful" or "excellent" as the element rating. If

two log entries are "successful" and two are*

"outstanding," the rater must assign "excellent" as

the element rating.

(4) Special provisions apply when rating an element as

unacceptable. Refer to Paragraph 23 of this section

for the procedures for documenting unacceptable

performance.

(5) The rating official will mark the block on the rating

form which reflects the adjective rating for each

element, write narrative comments in the space provided

for each element and write narrative comments on the

employee's overall performance in the "rater's

comments" section of the form. Rating officials are

also encouraged to complete the training and career

development section of the form with recommendations

for training or other developmental activities.

(6) For dual or multiple supervision, all supervisors of 90

days or more should provide input into the rating

process and initial the rating form as rating

officials. Reviewing officials may also seek input

from supervisors of lesser periods of time.

b. Overall Rating

(1) The overall rating is assigned by the reviewing

official, based on the individual element ratings.

Reviewing officials assign the overall rating by

marking the appropriate block and writing narrative

comments in the "reviewer's comments" section of the

form.

(2) Except in the case of outstanding ratings, the rating

assigned by the reviewing official is the final rating.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 30

If the proposed rating is outstanding, the Chief

Executive Officer or Assistant Director is the

approving official. Reviewing officials must adjust

individual element ratings to be consistent with the

overall rating, however, any such changes by the

reviewer must be substantiated by the comments in the

reviewing official's block on the rating form.

(3) Unacceptable performance in one or more elements

mandates an overall rating of unacceptable.

(4) An overall rating of minimally satisfactory is

demonstrated by minimally satisfactory performance in

more than one element and no element rated as

unacceptable.

* (5) An overall rating of successful is demonstrated by a

rating of successful or higher in a majority of the*

elements, no more than one minimally satisfactory

element, and no unacceptable element.

* (6) An overall rating of excellent is demonstrated by a

rating of excellent or higher in a majority of the

elements and no element rated less than successful.*

(7) An overall rating of outstanding is demonstrated by a

rating of outstanding in a majority of the elements and

* no element rated less than excellent.*

(8) In the event of an equal number of element ratings, the

reviewing official has full discretion in approving the

overall rating that best reflects the employee's

performance.

14. FINAL DISCUSSION. After the reviewing official has approved

the final rating (and the approving official has approved an

outstanding rating), the rating form is returned to the rating

official for discussion with the employee. No rating will be

discussed with the employee until after the reviewing official

(and, if necessary, the approving official) has approved the

final rating. The rating official should give adequate time and

attention to this part of the evaluation process. Rating

officials are strongly encouraged to specify areas in which their

employees should seek out training, education, or other

developmental activities to improve skills and/or knowledge or

enhance career advancement and promotion potential (using Section

H on the appraisal form for this purpose). The employee will

sign the bottom of the form, indicating that the performance

rating has been discussed, and a copy of the rating will be given

to the employee. The original copy of the rating, with

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 31

signatures, will be returned to the HRM office for recording and

filing. This is also an appropriate opportunity to review the

performance standards for the next rating period and obtain the

rater's and employee's signatures on the blank form which will be

used for the next rating period.

15. FILING AND DISPOSITION OF PERFORMANCE LOGS AND RATING FORMS

a. Distribution instructions for the rating form are printed

on the form.

b. The original, signed copy of a completed rating form,

including continuation sheets, will be filed in the HRM office,

either in the employee's individual Employee Performance File or

on the left side of the employee's Official Personnel Folder. A

copy of the employee's performance standards may be filed with

the rating form or may be maintained in a separate master file of

performance standards.

c. Completed performance ratings will be retained for four

years and will be forwarded to a gaining agency in the event of

the employee's transfer.

d. Rating officials will retain the performance log for one

year after the performance rating is approved.

e. If a rating is increased or changed as a result of a

successfully pursued grievance or other proceeding, the amended

rating will be filed and the contested rating removed and

destroyed.

f. The final adjective rating will be keyed into the NFC

system, in accordance with instructions in the Payroll/Personnel

Processing Manual.

16. PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES

a. The probationary period is an extension of the examination

and selection process and provides an opportunity for management

to assess the total suitability of new employees. It is the

policy of the Federal Bureau of Prisons to provide probationary

employees with an intensive program to ensure that they are

provided with direction in their jobs and are capable of

performing effectively.

b. Probationary employees receive formal progress reviews

immediately following the third, sixth and ninth months of

employment, as described in paragraph 12 of this section.

c. The supervisor of a probationary employee must, no earlier

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 32

than the beginning of the fourth month and no later than the end

of the tenth month of probation, submit a signed certification

that the employee's performance and conduct have been found

satisfactory or that the employee's performance and conduct have

been found unsatisfactory. The certification must include a

recommendation as to whether the employee should be retained

beyond the probationary period. The earlier progress reviews

form the basis for this certification and recommendation as to

retention. A probationary employee may be separated after the

tenth month following a positive certification and recommendation

if performance or conduct deteriorate.

d. Failure to meet the standards of performance and

satisfactorily complete training will be a basis for

disqualifying an employee during the probationary period. No

part of this section is to be interpreted as discouraging or

preventing the initiation of removal action at any time during

the probationary year if it is determined, after a full and fair

trial, that the employee's performance or conduct is not

satisfactory. Employees in the competitive service who are

serving a probationary period are excluded from the provisions of

5 C.F.R. Part 432 governing performance-based reduction in grade

and removal actions.

17. INFORMING SUPERVISORS AND EMPLOYEES. In recognition of the

importance of the performance appraisal Program and its

significance to both supervisors and employees, a copy of this

section of the manual will be provided to all non-bargaining unit

employees upon its issuance and to new non-bargaining unit

employees when they enter on duty. In addition, the Human

Resource Manager will ensure that all current rating and

reviewing officials receive a copy of this section and will give

new rating and reviewing officials a copy when they assume such a

position.

Human Resource Managers are responsible for providing advice and

assistance to supervisors on all aspects of this program and are

encouraged to conduct periodic formal training to review the

purposes and procedures of performance appraisal.

Supervisors are responsible for discussing the performance

evaluation program with their subordinates, including explaining

the purpose of the program, rating procedures and how the process

furthers employee and management goals.

18. PERFORMANCE RATING GRIEVANCES. Non-bargaining unit

employees may seek to change their performance ratings, or

Performance log entries by using the agency grievance procedure

contained in Section 771.1 of this Manual.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 33

19. RELATIONSHIP TO WITHIN-GRADE INCREASES. To be eligible for

a within-grade step increase, an employee must meet the

requirements described in 5 CFR 531.404 (General Schedule) or

5 CFR 532.417 (Prevailing Rate System). One of these

requirements is that the employee must demonstrate an acceptable

level of competence in the duties and responsibilities of their

position. Acceptable level of competence is determined by the

employee's most current rating of record being an overall rating

*of successful or higher. The rating of record used as the *

basis of a within-grade increase determination must have been

assigned no earlier than the most recently completed appraisal

period. If a decision to grant or deny the within-grade increase

is inconsistent with the most recent rating of record, a more

current rating of record must be prepared. If the employee’s

*most recent rating of record is successful or higher and the*

performance has deteriorated below an acceptable level of

competence, a new rating of record must be prepared on which to

base the decision to deny the increase. Similarly, if the most

*recent rating of record was below successful and the *

performance has improved to an acceptable level of competence, a

new rating of record must be prepared on which to base the

decision to grant the increase.

A supervisor who determines that an employee does not or may not

demonstrate an acceptable level of competence will notify the

employee in writing at least 60 days before the date on which the

employee will complete the required waiting period for a within-grade increase. At least 15 days prior to the end of the waiting

period, the supervisor will tentatively determine whether

withholding the increase is warranted. If the employee fails to

demonstrate an acceptable level of competence, the next higher

supervisory level will review the supervisor's tentative

determination. If both supervisors agree to withhold the

increase, the immediate supervisor will so advise the employee in

writing, stating the reasons for withholding the increase and

referring to the advance notice given to the employee.

General Schedule employees are entitled to request

reconsideration of a decision to withhold a within-grade increase

and to present orally and in writing the reasons he/she believes

the decision should be reversed. If the decision is to grant the

increase, the employee will be certified as meeting the

acceptable level of competence and the increase will be granted

retroactively as of the end of the waiting period.

General Schedule and Federal Wage System employees may contest a

performance rating on which a negative determination is based

under the agency grievance procedure contained in Section 771.1.

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 34

20. QUALITY STEP INCREASES AND PERFORMANCE AWARDS. Refer to the

Incentive Awards Manual for eligibility criteria for Quality Step

Increases and performance awards.

21. ADDRESSING DEFICIENT PERFORMANCE. Addressing performance

deficiencies and taking performance-based actions appropriately

are important aspects of a sound performance management system.

Procedures and requirements for addressing performance which

falls below the acceptable level are discussed in the following

paragraphs.

Acceptable performance is performance that meets the

performance standard or requirement at the level above

unacceptable. Under the Bureau of Prisons performance appraisal

program, this level is the minimally satisfactory level.

22. MINIMALLY SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE. When instances of

performance or overall performance are deemed to be minimally

satisfactory, the supervisor should determine what action is best

suited to the particular circumstances after discussion with the

employee. Counseling, training, and closer supervision are the

most commonly practiced options available. These efforts should

be thoroughly documented. If minimally satisfactory performance

continues, the supervisor has the option of continuing

counseling, training, or closer supervision or finding that the

employee's performance has become unacceptable.

23. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE. These procedures will be followed

at any time during the rating cycle when a supervisor records an

instance of performance below the acceptable level in one or more

elements of the performance standards in the employee's

performance log. Again, employee performance below the minimally

satisfactory level is considered unacceptable.

a. Unacceptable Performance Warning. When a supervisor

records an instance of unacceptable performance, he/she will

issue the employee a written warning of a potentially

unacceptable performance rating. This warning letter must

include:

(1) Notification of the element or elements in which

performance is unacceptable.

(2) Specific examples of the unacceptable performance.

(3) The performance requirements or standards which must be

attained in order to demonstrate acceptable performance. The

acceptable level of performance for purposes of retention in the

position under the Bureau's five-level performance appraisal

system is the level between the "unacceptable" level and the

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 35

*"successful" level, specifically performance which is *

"minimally satisfactory."

(4) A reasonable opportunity period to demonstrate

acceptable performance on the elements at issue. This

opportunity period will normally not be less than 30 days nor

more than 90 days following the issuance of the warning letter

and will be determined under the circumstances of the particular

case. The initially established period may be extended at the

agency's discretion for extenuating circumstances such as

extended periods of absence during the opportunity period.

(5) Notice that the employee must improve to the acceptable

level by the conclusion of the opportunity period and must

sustain that level of performance for at least one year from the

start of the opportunity period.

(6) A structured performance improvement plan (PIP) to provide

the employee opportunities to demonstrate acceptable performance.

The PIP may include such activities as developmental assignments,

structured employee assistance or counseling, formal training,

on-the-job training, mentoring or any other activity which the

supervisor believes will afford the employee an opportunity to

demonstrate acceptable performance.

Careful records must be kept of assistance offered and results

achieved under the PIP.

(7) Explanation of actions which may be initiated if the

unacceptable performance continues or if acceptable performance

is not demonstrated.

Human Resource Managers will assist supervisors in preparing

performance warning letters. Warning letters must be approved by

the Regional HRM Office and the LMR Section before being issued

to the employee.

b. Improved Performance During the Opportunity Period. If, at

the conclusion of the opportunity period, the rating official

determines that the employee has improved to an acceptable level

in the element which formed the basis for the opportunity period,

no further action will be taken. When it is time for the annual

rating, the rating official will consider the instance of

unacceptable performance along with other recorded instances of

performance for that element and give it appropriate weight in

assigning the rating for that element.

c. Additional Unacceptable Performance During the Opportunity

Period. If, at the conclusion of the opportunity period, the

rating official determines that the employee has not improved to

P3000.03

12/19/2007

Chapter 4, Page 36

an acceptable level in the element which formed the basis for the

opportunity period, then the rating official will prepare a

performance rating, whether or not it is time for the annual

rating. The element will be rated unacceptable and the proposed

overall rating will be unacceptable.

(1) If it is not time for the annual rating and the

reviewing official does not concur with the proposed

unacceptable rating, then no rating will be issued.

However, if at any time during the remainder of the

rating period the supervisor notes another instance of

unacceptable performance in the same element, he/she

will again propose an unacceptable rating.

(2) If it is time for the annual rating and the reviewing

official does not concur with the proposed unacceptable

rating, then the reviewing official's rating is the

final rating. The reviewing official must adjust the

individual element ratings to support the overall

rating given and substantiate these changes in the

reviewing official's comments on the rating form.

(3) Whether or not it is time for the annual rating, if the

reviewing official concurs with the proposed

unacceptable rating, then an unacceptable rating will

be issued together with a notice of proposed action in

accordance with Paragraph 24 of this section.

d. Additional Unacceptable Performance During the Twelve

Months Following the Beginning of the Opportunity Period. In

order to demonstrate acceptable performance following a

performance warning letter, employees are required to improve

their performance to an acceptable level and sustain that level

of performance for twelve months following the beginning of the

opportunity period. Therefore, if a supervisor notes

unacceptable performance in the same element which formed the

basis for the warning letter at any time during the twelve months

following the beginning of the opportunity period, he/she will

prepare a proposed unacceptable rating as described in Paragraph

23c above. This is the case even if the employee did demonstrate

acceptable performance during the opportunity period and/or

received a performance rating at or above the acceptable level

since the issuance of the warning letter.