Challenging a federal performance appraisal

[Anonymous]

Have you ever challenged or contested a federal performance appraisal? And how did it go? We’re you able to have your appraisal changed?

I believe that my appraisal is very incorrect, particularly on one of the more important elements. I like my manager but I don’t know what she is thinking here.

[Anonymous]

What is your rating? I've seen someone challenge a commendable and end up with a fully successful. Unless you can document inconsistencies or inaccurate information, it will be an uphill slog especially if you are going for an outstanding (the actual guidance is that is should be nearly impossible to achieve).

[Anonymous]

I have always gotten “exceeds fully successful” and this year have been rated “fully successful.” I was recently promoted to a GS-14 but also I have been working my BUTT OFF for the past year. I believe it was my best performance ever, not that I deserve a downgrade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have always gotten “exceeds fully successful” and this year have been rated “fully successful.” I was recently promoted to a GS-14 but also I have been working my BUTT OFF for the past year. I believe it was my best performance ever, not that I deserve a downgrade.

They have higher expectations because you were promoted.

[Anonymous]

Do people really care about these things outside of personal pride?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do people really care about these things outside of personal pride?

I think it will eventually affect potential promotions but I also believe I DID rise to the level of my promotion.

[Anonymous]

Yes, and I was mostly successful. Maybe the process varies by fed agency, but I had to file a rebuttal. It really didn't matter who won because I didn't care about getting promoted. The manager was kind of an A-hole. The facts were on my side, so I asked them to change the review based on the facts I presented. They refused and someone from the same office (higher level employee) actually did an extremely thorough investigation. The investigator basically sided with me and the wording in the review was changed. The problem with the process is that the power dynamic is not in your favor. For example, both the investigator, my A-hole manager, and the person who approves or denies the changes are all higher level employees who basically work in the same office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do people really care about these things outside of personal pride?

Bonus tiers are often based on ratings

[Anonymous]

An employee if mine did this last year (wanting one element changed from a 4 to a 5, which I found a bit ridiculous). I talked to my management about it and we changed it, figuring morale and relationships were worth it. It was contested in writing.

[Anonymous]

When you contest it in writing, what do you say? There is no narrative provided for the “fully successful” element.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you contest it in writing, what do you say? There is no narrative provided for the “fully successful” element.

DP, We have to provide narratives regardless of rating even though fully successful doesn't technically require one. If my information was factually incorrect, I'd expect to lose if an employee challenged it. Then again, I'd change the rating and apologize profusely if my data was wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you contest it in writing, what do you say? There is no narrative provided for the “fully successful” element.

You write a narrative saying in concrete terms how you believe you met the higher rating standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you contest it in writing, what do you say? There is no narrative provided for the “fully successful” element.

DP, We have to provide narratives regardless of rating even though fully successful doesn't technically require one. If my information was factually incorrect, I'd expect to lose if an employee challenged it. Then again, I'd change the rating and apologize profusely if my data was wrong

My manager is nice, but lazy. I think she just didn’t want to write anything and so chose fully successful for the elements she didn’t want to write about. I know that doesn’t sound like a great manager but I like her otherwise.

[Anonymous]

I have heard from more than one Fed that they often only give “meets” rating in the first year after a promotion. One person was directly told that the reason for receiving a meets was because it is the first year in the new position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have heard from more than one Fed that they often only give “meets” rating in the first year after a promotion. One person was directly told that the reason for receiving a meets was because it is the first year in the new position.

+1