TITLE:
LAKE MILLS POLICE
DEPARTMENT
POLICY
ISSUE DATE:
01/01/04
Performance Evaluations
LAST UPDATE:
01/01/04
SECTION:
Operational
POLICY SOURCE:
Chief of Police
FILE NAME:
EVALUATION
TOTAL PAGES:
12
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
Amends:
I.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the evaluation of employees.
II.
POLICY
The work performance of all department personnel will be accurately and effectively
evaluated. The criteria used for performance evaluation must be specific to the position
occupied by the employee during the rated period. Tasks that are set forth in the
respective job description form the basis for the description of what work is to be
performed and to what standard. The criteria used to define the quantity or quality of
work should be reasonable, descriptive, objective and measurable where possible or
feasible, allowing a characterization regarding how the work is to be performed.
III.
DISCUSSION
Performance evaluations standardize the nature of the personnel decision-making process,
ensure the public that the Department's personnel are qualified to carry out their assigned
duties, and provide job incumbents with necessary behavior modification information to
allow them to maintain behaviors that are deemed appropriate by the Department.
Performance evaluations are to be based only on performance that occurs during the
rating period. Performance of the employee prior to or following the rated period will be
excluded in the rating for that period.
The evaluation system is designed to serve both management and the employee by
fostering fair and impartial personnel decisions, improving and maintaining performance,
providing a medium for personnel counseling, facilitating proper decisions regarding
probationary employees, and providing an objective and fair means for measurement and
recognition of individual performance. The performance evaluation system also
identifies employee and organizational training needs that can be met by the Department's
continuing program.
IV.
PROCEDURE
A.
All employees will be evaluated annually.
Issued: 01/01/04
Page: 2
1.
The employee's performance, as defined by evaluations, provides
information concerning suitability for assignment, training needs, ability to
assume more responsibilities, and effectiveness in the assigned position.
The evaluation report shall be a key management tool and resource for
decisions pertaining to promotion, advancement, career development,
training and selection for specialized assignments.
2.
The performance evaluation system is based on the concept of
management by objectives. A basic premise of this concept is that active
participation by the rated employee results in better understood and more
acceptable performance objectives. This, in turn, causes that person to be
more committed and motivated to attain those objectives.
3.
The objectives for every position must be clearly defined, job-related, and
attainable through a reasonable amount of ability and effort. Both the
employee and the supervisor must know what is expected, how the results
will be measured, and must share a common concept of the desired end
result.
4.
Each employee shall be counseled at the beginning of the rating period
concerning:
5.
B.
EVALUATION
a.
Tasks of the position occupied
b.
Level of performance expected
c.
Evaluation rating criteria
While each measure of job performance should be clearly objective and
quantifiable, it is recognized that some areas of a person's job are
subjective in nature. Subjective standards are acceptable as long as they
are well-defined, understood, and verifiable. When changes in evaluation
standards occur, the reasons should be clearly communicated to all
interested parties.
Performance Evaluation Outline
1.
Within 15 days of the beginning of the evaluation period, each member of
the Department should receive a Performance Evaluation Outline based on
a job description for that position. The outline will consist of a minimum
of two major or key areas of responsibility. Performance standards or
objectives will be included for each major area to identify priority or
critical tasks or rater expectations that the employee will be evaluated on.
2.
Each employee must be furnished a copy of his/her performance
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 3
evaluation outline.
C.
D.
Evaluation Summary
1.
Whenever an evaluation is completed, a worksheet indicating the
employee's level of activity and performance for each performance
measure and area of responsibility shall be completed.
2.
Each performance evaluation report must be reviewed and signed by the
employee, his or her supervisor, and the Chief of Police. It is imperative
that each evaluation report on an employee's performance be read and
understood by the employee. An employee's signature only indicates that
the employee has read the report and does not imply agreement or
disagreement with the contents. If the employee refuses to sign the report,
the supervisor should so note and record the reason or reasons, if given.
3.
All evaluations completed should ensure objectivity, fairness, quality,
impartiality of ratings, and level of participation in counseling employees.
4.
Supervisors should be prepared to comment on the performance in order to
ensure the uniform application of ratings and to ensure the fairness and
validity of the system.
5.
Evaluation summaries shall contain the following information:
a.
Name of employee
b.
Position (Job Title) of employee
c.
Inclusive dates of evaluated period
d.
Signatures of employee, supervisor and Chief of Police.
6.
A copy of the evaluation must be provided to the employee upon
completion of the performance appraisal interview.
7.
Evaluation summaries for sworn and civilian employees will be kept in
each employee's personnel file. Completed performance evaluations will
be retained as permanent documents.
8.
Any letters of criticism documenting unsatisfactory performance should be
forwarded to the Chief of Police.
Prorating Standards / Work Hour Adjustments
1.
A quantitative measurement of hours worked can be used to reduce the
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 4
objective performance standards. Total hours worked will be based on
vacations, illnesses, injury, training, directed patrols and special
assignments or other Department sanctioned absences versus work hours
available. This gives the supervisor the ability to treat all employees the
same regardless of seniority, health or work circumstances.
2.
E.
The standard for minimally acceptable work is thus established initially for
the employee who works all available hours and is reduced proportionately
for any employee who works less than the available hours.
Required Reviews
1.
The formal review of each employee's performance will occur annually.
Informal reviews may be held as often as possible between the employee
and supervisor.
2.
The system is designed to evaluate an employee's recent past performance
in relation to the performance measures relative to his/her job
classification. This rating is a progress indication and formally provides
the employee with direction.
3.
Any employee that is deemed to be performing in an unsatisfactory
manner, must be notified in writing at least 90 days prior to the end of the
evaluation period.
4.
The evaluation should be prepared to substantiate ratings at the
unsatisfactory level, to advise the employee of his or her unsatisfactory
performance, and to define actions that should be taken to improve his or
her performance. If unsatisfactory performance continues, that should be
noted at the end of the 90 day period.
5.
Evaluators must substantiate ratings in the lowest or highest categories.
Written comments on the evaluation report are required of evaluators who
rate employees in the highest or lowest categories overall. This required
narrative commentary should detail specific reasons to substantiate the
ratings.
6.
The employee and the evaluator must have a face-to-face interview for all
evaluations. Employees may provide written comments that will be
attached to their evaluation. Such comments will be forwarded to the
evaluator completing the review and shall remain a part of the evaluation.
This should contribute to the fairness and objectivity of the evaluation
system.
7.
Upon completion of the evaluation, the evaluator will deliver the
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 5
employee's evaluation to the Chief of Police.
F.
8.
The Chief of Police will conduct and document an annual inspection of the
performance evaluation system. This inspection is to determine how well
the system functions. The objectives of the inspection should be to
identify instances of extreme ratings and the reasons for them and the
number of contested appraisals and the reasons for them.
9.
The necessity of meeting the evaluation completion dates is critical to the
effectiveness of the system. A performance measure for evaluators will be
their success or lack there of in meeting the established time frames.
10.
The established completion dates for evaluations can only be exceeded in
instances of appealed evaluations or cases involving exceptional
circumstances.
Change of Assignment or Transfer
1.
H.
I.
Personnel who change duties during the rating period may necessitate a
special or prorated performance evaluation for the previously held
position.
Probationary Personnel
1.
Probationary employees will be evaluated under the Field Training Officer
program on a bi-weekly basis.
2.
The focus of evaluating probationary employees must be on determining
whether or not they can perform the required work to Departmental
standards and expectations and determining at the earliest possible point,
whether or not they are suitable for continued permanent employment.
This requires FTO’s and supervisors to closely monitor probationary
personnel. Written evaluations are an integral part of this process.
Performance Below Acceptable Standards
1.
Employees are required and expected to consistently perform to the
minimum acceptable standard or higher for all standards set forth in their
respective performance evaluation. Officers whose performance is below
the minimum level are subject to discipline in accordance with
Department policy.
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Kathleen Hansen
Chief of Police
Page: 6
Date: 01-01-04
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 7
APPENDIX A
STANDARDS APPLICATIONS
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM USING 1 THRU 10 RATINGS
Applicable for Sworn Officers, Community Service Officers, and Dispatch Staff
ONE or TWO - Unacceptable Performance
The employee's performance clearly and consistently fails to meet work requirements.
This rating indicates inadequate and unacceptable performance. The employee shows
either an unwillingness and/or an inability to improve. It characterizes an employee
whose performance is substantially below the standard or objective.
The employee has been on the job long enough to have shown better performance. The
evaluator must counsel the employee as to he seriousness of this matter and the
employee's responsibility to improve the performance as quickly as possible.
The lack of productivity or the poor quality of performance is hindering others whose job
interrelates with the employee. Others are forced to help carry the employee's workload.
The employee has to realize that the job is not getting done.
If performance continues at this low level, the employee should be replaced.
Repeated counseling is ineffective.
The employee does not accomplish routine as well as special assignments. Work keeps
falling behind. The lack of performance is affecting the evaluator's credibility and unit
integrity.
The employee makes one mistake after another, often the same mistake. Constantly asks
questions and advice on matters that should be common knowledge. Apparent lack of
knowledge is not consistent with seniority, ability, experience, and/or training.
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 8
THREE to FOUR - Substantial Improvement Needed.
The employee's performance often fails to meet work requirements. The employee has
demonstrated some willingness or ability to improve performance, but only on occasion.
This occurs mostly after performance counseling, for short periods, and is not sustained.
Performance is less than satisfactory and requires that steps be taken for consistent
improvement. The rating characterizes performance that is below average and is less than
competent.
While the performance often is poor, the employee may improve with additional
counseling and/or training efforts. The employee needs some pushing and
follow-through, but does the job somewhat competently under close guidance and
supervision.
The employee is not usually self-motivated and requires the evaluator to plan any special
event or project. After such extensive briefing or planning, the project will usually be
accomplished with adequate results. Others in the work group often have to "carry" the
employee. Discipline may be needed to get the employee to consistent, long term
minimally acceptable performance.
FIVE or SIX - Achieves Expected Outcome.
Performance is routinely adequate and he/she regularly meets work requirements. This
rating reflects the employee's willingness and ability to meet an acceptable level of
performance that is established. The performance is to standard only, although there may
be brief periods of slight improvement or lack of results.
The employee is doing an adequate and satisfactory job. Performance is what is expected
of the employee, given the standards, and his/her seniority, experience, ability, and
training background.
The employee is not required to improve significantly. Errors are few and seldom
repeated. The employee displays an adequate balance between quality and quantity of
work and has proven capable of handling all of the routine work assignment or duties of
the job.
Very rarely does the officer perform beyond the scope of the normal duties. Does not
seek additional responsibility. Is content to do the normal, traditional duties associated
with the position. Requires normal supervision and follow-up. The employee is
considered a competent member of the unit and can be given most duties with a
reasonable assurance of completing them to the rater's satisfaction and standard.
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 9
SEVEN or EIGHT - Exceeds Standards & Objectives.
Performance regularly meets and often exceeds the work requirements. The employee
often exhibits a desire and ability to exceed standards that are routinely adequate and to
be above the norm or average by doing more than is expected.
The employee may accomplish more than expected. Is able to take on extra projects and
tasks without defaulting in other activities. Each project or job attempted, is done
thoroughly and routinely well. Shows initiative and is a self-starter.
Performance is of uniformly high quantity and quality results. The employee does his/her
own advanced planning, anticipates problems, and takes appropriate action for all routine
and most special situations. Shows a good grasp of the situation beyond the apparent
things. Thinks beyond the details of the job and works toward the overall objectives of
the job and the Department.
The employee should be given consideration for greater responsibility and/or promotion
in the future.
NINE or TEN - Distinguished or Unique Performance.
Performance is clearly superior in meeting work requirements and demonstrates
consistent exceptional desire and ability. Sets an example for others to follow. This
rating characterizes an excellent employee who consistently and routinely does far more
than what is expected.
Demonstrates knowledge and ability beyond what could be expected for an individual
with the same seniority, experience, and level of training. Recognized as an expert in a
particular job area. The performance and actions display a complete understanding of
assigned duties and special projects or assignments.
Requires little or no supervision. Invariably takes the best approach for getting the job
done right with routinely commendable results.
Routinely volunteers for projects and special assignments. Does well in all without
hurting high performance of generally assigned duties.
The guidelines established above must be used by evaluators in applying actual numerical
ratings to subject standards. The language should be taken somewhat literally in order to
accurately reflect the individual's performance in terms of behavior and adherence to the
established performance criteria. In a further sense, the guidelines can be applied to an
Area of Responsibility and also, to the overall evaluation. In order to rate in the overall
sense, the rater must rate individual standards in the same manner throughout the final
rating process.
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 10
APPENDIX B
STANDARDS APPLICATIONS
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM USING .5 THRU 2.0 RATINGS
0
Failed to Meet Goal (Serious deficiencies and is well below full performance
standards; failed to meet almost all of measurement criteria.)
.25
.50
Partially Met Goal (Meets standards in some respects but generally at a less than
satisfactory level; employee failed to meet one or more of the measurement
criteria.)
.75
1.00
Met Goal (Performance meets job standards; Employee did what was required
meeting all measurement criteria considered.
1.25
1.50
Exceeded Goal (Performance exceeded job standards; employee exceeded one or
more of the measurement criteria considered.)
1.75
2.00
Substantially Exceeded Goal (Performance greatly exceeds job standards;
employee greatly exceeded expectations on almost all measurement criteria
considered; accomplishment of the objective is significantly above standards set.)
MEASUREMENT CRITERIA
1 - QUALITY:
Consider accuracy, clarity, thoroughness, acceptability, usefulness of
results, whether standards or specifications were met, efficiency.
2 - QUANTITY:
Volume, how much, how many.
3 - TIMELINESS:
Deadlines met, turnaround time, promptness.
4 - MANNER OF PERFORMANCE:
5 - COST EFFECTIVENESS:
Methods utilized, how objective was accomplished,
reaction of others affected.
Cost savings, staying within budget guidelines or
parameters.
Issued: 01/01/04
OTHER:
EVALUATION
Page: 11
Consider any other methods of measuring performance that do not fall
under the above criteria.
Issued: 01/01/04
EVALUATION
Page: 12
APPENDIX C
STANDARDS APPLICATIONS
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USING BEHAVIORALLY-ANCHORED SCALE
SUCCESSFUL:
Represents good, solid performance and job knowledge. Errors are few
and not repeated.
SUCCESSFUL WITH
IMPROVEMENT NEEDED:
Overall performance in a specific job element
is successful but there is an identifiable need to address a
specific performance concern that is explained to the
employee by the evaluator. Failure by the employee to
make the improvement by the next evaluation period may
result in an unsuccessful rating.
UNSUCCESSFUL: Reflects inadequate, unacceptable performance.
(See specific behaviorally-anchored rating scales for each type of rated job position and each
major area of responsibility that applies to that position.)
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM ASSIGNMENTS BY JOB POSITION
ONE THRU TEN RATING SCALE:
Community Service Officer(s)
Sworn Officers
Dispatch Staff
.5 THRU 2.0 RATING SCALE:
(City Of Lake Mills)
Sergeants
BEHAVIORALLY-ANCHORED RATING SCALE:
Sworn and Dispatch personnel
Community Service Officer(s)