Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Tutorial on Staff
Performance
Contracting
By:
Directorate of Performance
Contracting and Appraisal (DiPCA)
JKUAT
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Tutorial 3:
Evaluation of Staff
Performance
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Performance Appraisal at JKUAT
JKUAT undertakes Staff Performance Appraisal using the modified 360 Degree Feedback System that is integrated with Performance Contracting.
The system takes into account not only personal attributes of the individual
but also their delivery of negotiated and agreed targets. This makes it
possible to clearly measure the contribution of individual members of staff
to the overall performance of the University.
There are two instruments used in the appraisal of all staff in the University.
The first instrument (F-2-70-13-1) is used by the Departmental evaluation
committee, a peer, an employee working below rank of appraisee, customer
and self to award scores on personal attributes. This part is coordinated by
the Human resource manager and shall carry 50% score which is broken
down as shown below. In the case of teaching staff, the customer score is
obtained from the student lecturer evaluation coordinated by DAQA.
Figure 1: Staff performance appraisal in the modified 360-degree system
3
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
SELF (5)
PEERS (10)
SURBODNATE (10)
COMMITTEE (10)
CUSTOMER (15)
Performance Contract
(50)
The second instrument (F-2-53-1-1) is used to assess staff on the basis of
negotiated and agreed targets by the members of staff and their Heads of
Department. This is coordinated by DIPCA and shall carry 50% score. This
second instrument is the subject of this tutorial.
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Evaluation of Performance
Performance evaluation is the culmination of the process of performance
contracting and is carried out at the end of the Contract (after 30th June). The
evaluation based on the performance contract shall contribute to 50% of the
Performance Appraisal for the staff member during the Contract Period.
Performance evaluation is performed to establish the measurement of the
extent to which a member of staff achieves negotiated performance targets. It is
grounded on a few fundamental principles:

It entails comparison of achievement to targets.

The achievement score is based on evidence provided.

Every indicator is assessed on the basis of targets, weights and units of
measurement and notes provided in the performance contract (F-2-53-11).

After confirmation of achievements with respect to targets scores are
computed using a formula that is discussed below.
Computation of Scores
Computation of score is conducted in three steps as follows:
I. Calculate raw score:
II.
III.
Weighted score: multiply the raw score by their weight
Composite score: add the weighted scores of all targets
4
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Calculation of raw score:
Calculation of the raw score is based on the Actual Achievement (A) as it relates
to the Target (T). For each indicator, a raw score shall be assigned based on
percentage as follows:
S.No
Achievement
Raw Score
1
More than 125% of the Target
2
Less than 125 % of the Target
(a)
1 + [((A/T)-0.25)/0.25] (b)
5
A = Actual achievement; T= Target achievement
Where maximum Achievement is 100% of
Target (i.e. target cannot be exceeded)
1 + [((A/T)-0.20)/0.20]
(c)
Table 1: Methodology for calculating the raw score of any achievement
The maximum raw score in this system is 5 for each indicator. There are three
scenarios that may occur:
a)
Any achievement that is 25% beyond the set target, i.e. if Actual
Achievement/ Target (i.e. A/T) is 125% or more, the outright maximum
score of 5 is given. This applies for indicators whose achievement can
exceed 100%.
b)
If achievement can exceed 100% and the achievement is below 125% of
target, the equation marked as (b) is applied. In this scenario it can be seen
an achievement of 125% yields a raw score of 1 + [((125/100)-0.25)/0.25] = 5
and 100% yields a raw score of 1 + [((100/100)-0.25)/0.25] = 4.
c)
For Indicators where achievement beyond 100% is not feasible, the
equation marked as (c) is applied. In this scenario it can be seen an
achievement of 100% yields a raw score of 1 + [((100/100)-0.20)/0.20] = 5.
In the example carried over from Tutorial 2 the raw score is calculated by
applying the appropriate case scenario.
5
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
The following steps are applied in calculating the raw score:
1.
2.
The performance contract is recalled to obtain the targets and weights.
The achievement in the Annual (4th Quarter) Report as confirmed by the
HoD is used together with the corresponding target and weight to
calculate the raw score. Remember, all quarterly reports must be
submitted promptly and are used to monitor the progressive
achievement.
Units
Performance Indicator
Weight Target
1
1
Practicals conducted
No.
3
2
Budgets for teaching materials prepared
No.
1
3
3
Practical assessment administered
%
2
100
4
Departmental equipment maintained
%
2
100
5
Inventory of laboratory reagents and consumables
maintained
%
1
100
6
Incident/ occurrence records maintained
%
1
100
TOTAL WEIGHT
63
10
Table 2: Contract matrix
Performance Indicator
Units Weight Target
2
Achieved
1
Practicals conducted
No.
3
63
2
Budgets for teaching materials prepared
No.
1
3
3
3
Practical assessment administered
%
2
100
100
4
Departmental equipment maintained
%
2
100
95
5
Inventory of laboratory reagents and
consumables maintained
%
1
100
100
6
Incident/ occurrence records maintained
%
1
100
85
TOTAL WEIGHT
75
10
Table 3: Annual (4th Quarter) Report
6
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
3.
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Using the appropriate formula for each indicator, the raw score calculated.
For example, indicator 1 is of case (b) type and the raw score is computed as
1 + [((75/63)-0.25)/0.25] = 4.8 OR 1 + [((119/100)-0.25)/0.25] = 4.8 .
Indicator 2 is of case (c) type and the raw score is computed as
1 + [((100/100)-0.20)/0.20] = 5. The case (c) formula also applies to indicators 3
to 6 in this particular example.
Performance Indicator
%
Achieved
1 Practicals conducted
Budgets for teaching
119
100*
Practical assessment
100*
Departmental equipment
95*
2 materials prepared
3 administered
4 maintained
5
6
Inventory of laboratory
reagents and consumables
maintained
Incident/ occurrence
records maintained
100*
85*
Weight Raw Score Weighted Score
3
1
2
2
1
1
3
4.8
5.0
= 3 x 4.8
4 14.3
= 1 x 5.0
5.0
5.0
= 2 x 5.0
10.0
= 2 x 4.8
9.5
= 1 x 5.0
5.0
= 1 x 4.3
4.3
4.8
5.0
4.3
10
Composite Score
5
48.1
* Case (c)
Table 4: Evaluation of performance
Computation of weighted score:
4.
A weighted score for each indicator is computed by multiplying the raw
score by the agreed weight of the indicator.
Computation of composite score:
5.
A composite score for all indicators is computed by adding the weighted
scores of all targets.
The score of 48.1 obtained in this example implies 48.1/50 as the performance
evaluation of this member of staff.
See a different example in the next page.
7
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Performance Indicator
Units
1 Cleaning Schedule prepared
Date
3
July 5th 2015
2
3
4
5
%
No.
%
%
2
2
2
1
10
100
4
100
100
Target
Achieved
Desks and tables dusted
Cobwebs removed
Mail delivered on time
Mail register updated
TOTAL WEIGHT
Weight
Target
Table 5(a): Contract Matrix
Units
Performance Indicator
1 Cleaning Schedule prepared
Date
3
July 5th 2015
July 5th 2015
%
2
100
100
Number
2
4
2
%
%
2
1
100
100
90
80
2 Desks and tables dusted
3 Cobwebs removed
Weight
4 Mail delivered on time
5 Mail register updated
TOTAL WEIGHT
10
Table 5(b): Report
Performance Indicator
1
2
3
4
5
% Achieved Weight Raw Score
Cleaning Schedule prepared
Dusting of desks and tables
Removal of cobwebs
Mail delivered on time
Mail register updated daily
100*
100*
50
90
80
Composite Score
3
2
2
2
1
10
5
5
2
3.6
3.2
Weighted Score
= 3 x 5.0
= 2 x 5.0
= 2 x 2.0
= 2 x 3.6
= 1 x 3.2
15.0
10.0
4.0
7.2
3.2
39.4
* Case (c)
Table 5(c): Evaluation of Performance
8
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Evaluation of the performance contract is coordinated by the Directorate of
Performance Contracting and Appraisal (DiPCA) . It contributes 50% of the
overall staff appraisal.
6.
Once DiPCA has computed the evaluation score for the member of staff, the
score is forwarded to the Human Resource Manager for compilation with
the other sections of staff appraisal as shown below:
SCORE
SOURCE OF
SCORE
STAFF
CATEGORY
Awarded
Max
Evaluation on Values and Staff
Competency
SECTION II
ALL
8.5
10
Peer Evaluation
SECTION III
ALL
7
10
Evaluation by Employees below
Rank
SECTION IV
ALL
8
10
Self Assessment
SECTION V
ALL
4.8
5
SECTION VI
NONTEACHING
11
15
48.1
50
87.4
100
EVALUATION MEASURE
Customer Assessment (For NonTeaching Staff
Student/Lecturer Evaluation (For
Teaching Staff)
DAQA
TEACHING
Score for Performance Contract
DIPCA
ALL
OVERALL SCORE
Table 6: Evaluation of Performance
7.
The Human Resource Manager receives scores from the various sections and
computes the overall scores for each staff.
The score forwarded by the Directorate of Performance Contracting and
Appraisal (DiPCA) is highlighted in Table. %. A member of staff who does not
sign a performance contract or fails to submit quarterly reports automatically
gets a score of zero for performance contract section and is therefore
disadvantaged in the overall score.
9
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
The sections referred to as Section I, II, through to VI are found in form F-2-7013-1 that deals with personal attributes of the individual. This part is
coordinated by the Human Resource Manager and carries a total score of 50%.
The two parts of the appraisal system are thus combined by the Human
Resource Manager to give a staff member’s overall appraisal score out of 100.
8.
The Human Resource Manager assigns a performance grade based on the
overall score as follows:
OVERALL SCORE RANGE (%)
85 – 100
70 – 84
50 – 69
40 – 49
0 - 39
GRADE
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Table 7: Performance grades
In the example provided above, the overall score of 87.4 falls in the
Excellent category.
Using the steps provided herein. A member of staff should be able to perform
his own self-evaluation.
Integration of performance contracting into the 360-degree appraisal system
increases objectivity of the appraisal system through use of measurable
targets. It also enables linking appraisal to the mandate of the University and
responsibilities of the University staff.
10
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Parties involved in Performance Appraisal
1)
Appraisee (Individual Staff)
 Prepares, negotiates and signs performance contract with HOD
 Undertakes activities
 Prepares and submits reports
 Maintains evidence of activities and achievement
 Nominates appraisers
2)
Head of Department
 Coordinates performance appraisal in their departments
3)
Departmental Committees
 Conducts performance appraisal at the Department
4)
DiPCA
 Coordinates individual staff performance contracts
 Receives and consolidates staff performance scores and forwards to
the HR Department
 Sensitize staff on performance contracting and appraisal
5)
Directorate of Quality Assurance
 Coordinates student lecturer evaluation
6)
Human Resources Department
 Coordinates evaluation of personal attributes
 Consolidates appraisal scores
For more information on the Staff Evaluation at JKUAT download the JKUAT
Performance Appraisal Guidelines WI-2-53-1-1 from the DiPCA website
http://www.jkuat.ac.ke/directorates/dipca/. You may access this page from the
JKUAT homepage sidebar and select Information for Staff > Performance
Contract & Appraisal. Alternatively under the menu “About JKUAT” select
Directorates & Offices > Directorate of Performance Contracting and Appraisal.
The document is found under Downloads and Resources > Staff Performance
Appraisal Forms > Appraisal Guidelines.
11
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Concluding Remarks on the
Performance Contracting Process
Performance contracting:
 Does not replace terms of service of employees;
Does not lead to punishment or dismissal;
Should be negotiated;
Enhances service delivery and accountability of JKUAT;
Helps staff in their personal development.
Performance Contracting complements existing systems at JKUAT
It does not change the working arrangements in the Departments;
HODs may still assign staff additional duties (not covered by the
contract) from time to time
Staff should make sure they prepare contracts which they will negotiate and
sign with their HODs at the beginning of each FinancialYear (July/August)
12
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation
Tutorial 3: Evaluation of Performance Contract
Ref: JKU/2/053/030/1(91)
Visit DIPCA in Case of Any Query
For further information, welcome to our offices in DiPCA House,
next to Fundilima Sacco (Fedha House) in JKUAT, Main Campus.
Contacts:
Direct line: 020-2675850
Mobile: 0724944014 (Director)
VoIP Extension lines: 1052-1059
Email: dipca@jkuat.ac.ke
Website: http://www.jkuat.ac.ke/directorates/dipca/
13
JKUAT is ISO 9001: 2008 Certified │
Setting Trends in Higher Education, Research and Innovation