RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR ORD SUB-GROUP PANELS FOR INITIAL TESTING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 16, 2006
• Sequence Number: 34
• Publication Date: September 9, 1999
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
Recommended Procedures for ORD Sub-group Panels
For Initial Testing
General
The procedures given below and the accompanying work
sheet have been generated in response to the Executive
Committee (EXCOM) requirement that procedures for making
personnel decisions be standardized across organizations
within CIA. EXCOM did not lay down specific procedures but
merely directed that explicit procedures would be followed
by each organization. Further, EXCOM, provided twelve
specific factors which are to be taken into account by all
Career Service Boards and Sub-group Panels in making decisions
about promotions, assignment to comparative evaluation
categories, assignments, training, counseling and, if necessary,
adverse action. There is also a specific directive to
create and use a "Work Sheet" in the evaluative process.
The specific nature of this work sheet is left to the
discretion of the various organizations but it is mandated
that it may be kept for a period of one year after the evaluation
and the employee may request to be counseled on the basis of
the work sheet's contents. Each organization is encouraged
to tailor the work sheet, the Sub-group's procedures and the
interpretation of the evaluation factors. to meet the specific
organizational needs.
The procedures given below and the accompanying work
sheet represent ORD's response to the EXCOM's requirement.
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
 Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
In designing the procedures and the work sheet the unique
nature of the research process has been kept uppermost.
Further, a strenuous effort has been made to take into
account the fact that, in ORD, non-management professionals
must simultaneously exist in the technical world of their
profession and in the world of contract management.
The Work Sheet
The work sheet developed as a response to the EXCOM
mandate contains definitions of 14 factors which are to be
used in evaluating personnel. The factors are each to be
evaluated at one of five levels for each employee. The
levels are assigned weights from one to five. The user
should feel free to use decimal fraction weights (such as
3.5) if it is felt that greater discrimination is possible
or needed in any evaluation. The total score is the mean
score of those scales used by the appraiser.
The comments section at the bottom of each sheet should
be used to record any data, positive or negative, about the
appraisee which can not be covered by the rating scales.
Use of this comments section is strongly encouraged. The 14
scales can provide only a generalized framework within which
the employees are to be evaluated. Many, if not most,
appraisees will merit added comments, especially by those
appraisers who know them well.
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
 Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
The Procedures
Members of the evaluation Sub-group will be assigned
the task of assessing employees of a single grade level at
one time. They will begin this by first reviewing the
personnel files. Included in the file will be a copy of
each employee's current Advanced Work Plan (AWP) and the
recent Performance Appraisal Reports (PAR's). The appraisers
will record their opinions on the scales of the work sheet
and in the comments sections. If any member is unable
to evaluate the appraisee on any factor from this review of
the record, additional information should be obtained from
any appropriate source such as the employee's supervisor.
If after that time the appraiser still feels unqualified to
render an opinion in a given factor, that factor should be
left blank, and noted appropriately in the "comment" section.
All employees should be rated by every member of the Sub-
group before any decisions are addressed by the Sub-group as
a whole.
After all employees of one grade have been rated by
every member, the Sub-group will meet to consider the
decisions to be made. The first decision is that of assign-
ment to one of the four comparative evaluation categories*.
*It is recommended that this and all other decisions be
made first by the Sub-Group members individually and then by
reconciliation of differences in group discussions. During the
discussions the members should also direct their attention to
the development of a single composite work sheet which will
represent the consensus of the members and will constitute the
"official" work sheet to be made a matter of record for one year.
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
 Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3
In the discussions leading to these and other decisions each
member should be able to substantiate his/her opinion from
data entered in the work sheet either as ratings or auxiliary
comments.
Following completion of the assessment of employees of
a single grade to one of the four comparative evaluation
categories the members should next address the matter of
promotions, followed by the other categories of decisions
such as training etc. The last decisions to be made should
be the designation of those employees to be designated as
being in the "lowest three percent." The decisions in this
matter will be handled as all other decisions, that is, by
deliberation. It is specifically recommended that the rating
process not include any attempt to actually rank all employees
from "highest" to "lowest." Research has shown 'that this
procedure has very little validity insofar as it seems to
make fine discriminations. That is, if the number of people
so ranked is more than about ten, rank numbers which are
contiguous can be shown frequently to be in error.
The final action of the Sub-group is to finalize a com-
posite work sheet for each rated employee. This composite
work sheet should have ratings on all scales and should con-
tain any comments which might be of assistance to the coun-
seling officer should the employee request counseling.
Approved For Release 2007/10/23: CIA-RDP91-00452R000100170034-3