GUIDE FOR COMPETITIVE EVALUATION PANELS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 29, 2002
• Sequence Number: 14
• Publication Date: November 29, 1956
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-0182 R000800030014-0
1/
25X1
GUIDE FOR
COMPETITIVE EVALUATION
PANELS
29 November 1956
DISTRIBUTION: A plus SPECIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/1280-01826R000800030014-0
 25X1 r+
25X1
Approved For 2002/11/12 P80-018261
or .W
NO PERSONNEL
NO. 29 November 1956
GUIDE FOR COMPETITIVE EVALUATION PANELS
FOREWORD
This handbook is for the guidance of Agency personnel who are appointed by
Heads of Career Services to serve on Competitive Evaluation Panels.
The information presented, however, should be of equal interest to all super-
visors who will participate in the competitive evaluation process and who will,
in the final analysis, be largely responsible for its effectiveness.
The guidelines and procedures presented are intended to be advisory in nature
rather than regulatory. It is realized that variances in the composition of Career
Services and the dispersion, geographically and occupationally, of their personnel
will require the development by the Career Services of internal operating pro-
cedures to fit their needs. However, the use of this handbook to set the frame
of reference for the operations of Competitive Evaluation Panels of all Career
Services will provide a desirable degree of Agencywide uniformity in promotion
administration.
L. K. WHITE
Deputy Director
(Support)
1
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 LP80-01826R000800030014-0
25X1
 Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
N
HANDBOOK
NO.
O.
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
GUIDE FOR COMPETITIVE PROMOTION PANELS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPETITIVE
PROMOTION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . 1
II. THE COMPETITIVE PROMOTION PROCESS . . 2
III. SUPPORT PROVIDED TO COMPETITIVE
EVALUATION PANELS . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPETITIVE
PROMOTION PROGRAM
High esprit de corps of Agency Personnel depends to a considerable degree
upon the achievement of a fair and effective promotion system which will earn
and retain the respect of all members of the Agency. The Agency has adopted
the competitive evaluation promotion policy with the aim of ensuring maximum
equity, objectivity, and impartiality in promotions. This program is based to
some extent upon characteristics of the various promotion systems in the Foreign
Service Corps of the Department of State, private business, and the Military
Services, but is specifically designed to meet Agency objectives of building and
maintaining a Career Staff of high caliber. Its chief characteristics are:
A. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT:
Appraisal of the employee's value to the Agency in terms of the quantity and
quality of the work he has performed; his conduct, skills and personality;
and his potential for future assignments. A conscientious effort is made to
record, by means of the Biographic Profile and Fitness Report, complete,
factual, and objective information regarding each individual.
B. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ADVANCEMENT
WITHIN A CAREER SERVICE:
Every employee eligible for promotion is evaluated (1) annually, (2) in com-
parison with every other member of his Career Service who is in the same
grade and occupational category, and (3) in the case of personnel in grades
GS-7 through GS-14, by an impartial Competitive Evaluation Panel. This
system differs from the usual civil service practice where promotion depends
rigidly upon the grade of the job to which the individual is assigned.
C. GROUP JUDGMENT:
The relative standing of the person rated depends on group judgment.
The Fitness Report contains the opinions of individual supervisors and
reviewing officers; the annual competitive rating represents the consensus
of a group of experienced senior members of the employee's Career Service
with respect to the employee's merit for promotion in comparison with his
contemporaries. The objective is to make the promotion system genuinely
free from favoritism and bias.
D. SUFFICIENT SERVICE IN GRADE TO PROVIDE
A BASIS FOR EVALUATION:
The promotion system requires that personnel serve long enough in each
grade to provide a basis for a thorough evaluation of their performance at
the grade level. This is accomplished by establishing minimum periods of
service in each grade during which personnel are not in the zone of consid-
eration for promotion.
E. RECOGNITION OF MERIT BY ADVANCEMENT:
In each grade, the normal practice will be to promote those who are ranked
highest by the Competitive Evaluation Panel, provided their qualifications
1
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
25X1
 Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
HANDBOOK
NO
NO.
25X1
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
can be utilized to advantage at the next higher grade level. In other words,
the available promotions will go to those found by the panels and Heads of
Career Services to be the most competent,, and valuable to CIA.
A. FUNCTION AND COMPOSITION OF
COMPETITIVE EVALUATION PANELS:
Panel Competitive Evaluation of all eligible employees on the basis of
their performance, qualifications, acceptance of Career Staff obligations,
length of service, and value to the Agency is the most critical element in
the selection of personnel for promotion. The product of panel action
will consist of a list of employees ranked in order of merit for promotion
for the use of the Head of the Career Service in making final promotion
recommendations. The list will include the employees the panel con-
siders at the time of panel action to merit promotion within the numerical
limitation which may be prescribed by the Head of the Career Service.
Panels will be comprised of a minimum of three members of the Career
Service concerned, senior in grade to employees being evaluated, and
appointed by the Head of the Career Service to serve for the period
required to evaluate all eligible employees in the grade groups and com-
petitive promotion area(s) assigned.
B. INFORMATION USED BY PANELS IN EVALUATING EMPLOYEES:
1. Listing of all personnel in the zone of consideration for promotion in
the grade level to be evaluated.
2. Listing of personnel recommended for promotion (in order of preference
whenever practical) by Senior Supervisors.
3. An indication from the Head of the:! Career Service, if he desires, of the
number of personnel to be on the panel's rank order list. (The Head of
the Career Service may predetermine the approximate maximum num-
ber of promotions to be made at each grade level on the basis of guide-
lines, such as past promotion practice and the status of staffing of the
Career Service. Rather than reveal the maximum figures, he may
direct the panel to provide a rank order listing for each grade level
which will contain a somewhat larger number of names. This will pro-
vide for the likelihood that some individuals on the panel's rank order
listing will not be promoted for the reason that their qualifications are
not utilizable currently at the higher grade and the use of a personal
rank assignment is not considered appropriate.)
4. Form No. 1080, Biographic Profile (Figure 1), or an equivalent summary
of service and performance of each employee in the zone of considera-
tion. The Official Personnel Folder is also available to the panel if
needed.
5. Personal interview, whenever feasible, of employees, their supervisors,
or others having knowledge of the employees being evaluated. The
importance of interviews of persons in grades GS--12 and above par-
ticularly is stressed.
C. SIGNIFICANT FACTORS FOR PANEL CONSIDERATION
IN EVALUATING EMPLOYEES:
1. Performance (Productivity, Quality, and Level of Job Performed)
a. One of the chief considerations in competitively evaluating employees
is the performance factor, i.e., how well the job has been performed
and the quality and quantity of work done. In the interest of
rendering maximum equity in judging this factor, panel members
should bear in mind the level of the job performed by employees
sm-B"
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
 Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
NA
NO.
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
they evaluate. Otherwise, it may happen that an employee perform-
ing work of a lower level than his current grade will perform
exceptionally well and be rated unduly high, whereas an employee
performing work of a higher level than his current grade may be
rated too low. Thus, Fitness Reports and comparable ratings be-
come more meaningful when considered in relation to the char-
acteristics and level of the job performed.
b. In addition to past and current performance, the potentiality the
individual has demonstrated for the performance of more difficult
and responsible duties in the future is very important. Fitness
Report ratings on this factor and records of performance of assign-
ments of higher grade level should be considered carefully.
c. A common criticism of promotion panel systems is that they tend to
make employees reluctant to take initiative, but instead individuals
may be inclined to conform entirely to prevailing opinion. Since
this tendency would jeopardize the merit system and the effective-
ness of the Agency staff, every effort must be made to give due
credit to employees who have shown themselves capable of sound
independent judgment, creative work, self-reliance, and the accept-
ance of unusual responsibility. If the initiative of an employee has
led to some difficulty, he should not be severely judged because a
calculated risk did not work out if the attempted line of action was
worthwhile. Similarly, panel members should be wary of employees
who restrict their output in order to concentrate on a few work
products for the purpose of receiving special commendations.
d. Extra care should be taken to determine the merit for promotion of
employees whose duties give them opportunity for comparatively
little substantive output which can be readily evaluated, or whose
duties and performance cannot, for security reasons, be completely
documented. Similarly, employees engaged in training assignments
must be given full consideration for their efforts in the light of their
reported accomplishments during such training.
e. In evaluating the performance of employees performing executive
or supervisory duties, it is stressed that principal consideration
should be given to the demonstration of management skills. Of
importance are the demonstrated abilities of an executive or super-
visor to plan and organize his unit, establish sound policies, train
and supervise employees, achieve efficient operation, and accom-
plish the required objectives.
2. Acceptance of Career Staff Obligations
A factor which should be given considerable weight is the willingness
of the employee to meet his Career Staff obligations. This may be
exemplified by acceptance of assignments to isolated or hardship posts,
undertaking of specialized training which may lead to protracted
periods of service in difficult or unpleasant areas of the world and,
in general, by a demonstrated willingness to put the needs of the
Agency before personal preference or convenience.
3. Value of Employee to Agency
Developing and retaining the required number of qualified personnel
in all lines of work are problems which all Career Services must face.
The major objectives of the Agency Career Program include providing
Career Staff Members with a broader base of training and experience
to increase their versatility and assignment potential as well as devel-
oping employees in highly specialized fields. In competitively evaluat-
ing employees for promotion, consideration should be given to the pres-
ent value of the employee to the Agency, as well as his potential use-
fulness. Of pertinence to the value of an employee to the Agency is a
25X1
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
 Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
SIQUT
NA
NO.
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
consideration of possession of scarce occupational skills and experience
which are difficult to replace and which may have required arduous
training or unpleasant assignments for their acquisition.
4. Length of Service
Length of service in a grade level (beyond the minimum time require-
ment) shall be a factor in the evaluation of an employee's record in
that promotion must be earned by :meritorious performance over a
period of time sufficient for appraisal. Agency experience at lower
grade levels as well as experience gained prior to entry into CIA should
be evaluated on the basis of their applicability to an Agency career.
Notwithstanding the usual length of service requirements, it is im-
portant to keep in mind that no employee should be rated lower than
his performance merits simply because of the recency of his last promo-
tion. To do so might penalize unusual efforts and talents as well as
enhance the chances for promotion of those whose principal claim is
that of seniority.
5. Qualifications (Education, Experience, Training, Personal
Characteristics)
The degree to which an employee exceeds the minimum standards of
experience, training, and education is significant to his evaluation, pro-
viding the experience, training, and education is of demonstrated use-
fulness in connection with the employee's work and probable future
utilization, Personal characteristics should similarly be evaluated in
terms of their application to current and probable future assignments.
6. Other Considerations
a. Panels must ensure that individuals currently on assignments over-
seas or otherwise outside headquarters are given equal consideration
for promotion and are not penalized by their nonavailability for
interview nor by the problems of current documentation of per-
formance.
b. In evaluating employees whose records reflect adverse reports or
criticisms, care should be taken to determine whether the adverse
material has been out-dated by more recent favorable performance.
Giving undue weight to past reports of defects which an employee
has corrected may create an unjust permanent handicap to his
career. Thus, panels must be as sensitive to records reflecting
improved performance as they are to those which reflect deteriora-
tion.
c. Panel members' personal knowledge of an individual should not be
given undue weight. However, if a panel member, through personal
experience or otherwise, is cognizant of pertinent information not
in the records, he shall make that information available to the panel
for investigation and consideration. A panel member should dis-
qualify himself from ranking any candidate whom he may feel he
cannot objectively evaluate due to close association or strong per-
sonal feelings.
d. Whenever competitive evaluation establishes employees' ratings as
essentially equal, it is appropriate that panel members give added
weight to consideration of age,; length of qualifying experience, and
general background.
D. SUGGESTED STEPS IN COMPETITIVE RANKING BY PANELS:
1. Names of all eligible employees recommended for promotion by Senior
Supervisors will be provided to the panel by the Head of the Career
Service.
2. The records (Biographic Profile or equivalent) of the above employees
will be preliminarily reviewed by panel members for familiarization.
DoT
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
25X1
Aft
 Approved For Release 2002/11/12 ? C~ IA-RDP80-01826R -
"
HA PERSONNEL
NO. 29 November 1956
3. The records (Biographic Profile or equivalent) of all other eligible
employees in the competitive promotion area will be reviewed. From
this group, the names of any other employees considered by the panel
to warrant final ranking for promotion will be selected.
4. The names of employees recommended for promotion by Senior Super-
visors together with the names of other eligibles selected by the panel
will be considered for panel ranking. Whenever feasible, interviews
will be conducted with these employees, their supervisors, and others
having knowledge of their work. This step is particularly desirable
in the consideration of employees in grades GS-12 and above.
5. Each panel member will individually rank all employees (selected as
above) after completion of the review of Biographic Profiles or equiv-
alent summary of service and performance, and the completion of panel
discussions or interviews.
6. Upon review of the individual rankings, any wide discrepancies in
panel member rankings on any employee will be discussed and more
information obtained if necessary. Thereafter, panel members may
adjust their individual rankings.
7. The final ranking list will be computed as a composite of individual
rankings with equal weight being given to each panel member's judg-
ment. The individual rankings for each employee will be totalled,
and the final ranking will be determined by listing the employee with
the lowest total of ranking points first, the employee with the second
lowest total of ranking points, second, etc. If a panel member dis-
qualifies himself on ranking an individual, the rankings of the other
members will be given proportionately more weight in the mathematical
computation.
RANKING ORDER COMPUTATION (EMPLOYEES a, b, c, d, e)
EMPLOYEE RANKING BY PANEL MEMBERS
Rank Panel Member 1 Panel Member 2 Panel Member 3
1 a c a
2 C b b
3 e a c
4 b d e
5 d e d
DETERMINATION OF FINAL RANK ORDER OF EMPLOYEES
Final Ranking Employees Total Points
1 a 5
2 C 6
3 b 8
4 e 12
5 d 14
8. If the final list exceeds the maximum number of candidates for promo-
tion requested by the Head of the Career Service, the list will be adjusted
accordingly and forwarded to the Head of the Career Service for his use.
25X1
5
Approved For Release 2002/11 j 9P80-01826R000800030014-0
 Approved For Ruse 2002/111//122: CIA; RDP8 - 7 -0 25X1
HA4DBOOK
NO.1 NO
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
III. SUPPORT PROVIDED TO COMPETITIVE
EVALUATION PANELS
A. BY OFFICE OF PERSONNEL:
The Office of Personnel will be responsible for the program of preparing
accurate Biographic Profiles of personnel to be evaluated. Due to the
volume of work involved, participation by Personnel Officers, Career
Management Officers, and employees in this program will be necessary.
Additionally, the Office of Personnel will provide clarification on promo-
tion procedures, and furnish listings of personnel in the zone of considera-
tion, qualification requirements for specific positions or.lines of work, and
position evaluation information.
B. BY CAREER MANAGEMENT OFFICERS OF THE CAREER SERVICE:
Important responsibilities of Career Management Officers will be the pro-
vision of secretariat support to Competitive Evaluation Panels, the obtain-
ing of information concerning employees being evaluated before or during
panel considerations, and serving as a point of liaison between the panel
and Senior Supervisors.
C. BY PERSONNEL OFFICERS AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS IN
OPERATING OFFICES:
Personnel Officers and Administrative Officers will be responsible for en-
suring that lists of personnel recommended for promotion by Senior
Supervisors are provided to the panels and will assist Senior Supervisors
in this regard. They will participate with the Office of Personnel in
developing Biographic Profiles or the equivalent for panel use.
6
Approved For Release 2002/1 -9 -RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
 HANDBOOK
OPAPTi In)
PERSONNEL
29 November 1956
BIOGRAPHIC PROFILE
I. NAME (Last-First-Middle)
2. SEX
3. DATE OF BIRTH
4. LONGEVITY COMP. DATE
5. 13D
6. MARITAL STATUS
7?DEPENDENTS
(Exclud. employee)
NUMBER
YEARS(S) OF BIRTH
8? U.S. NATURALIZATION DATE
(I f app rop riete)
9. CAREER
EFFECTIVE DATE
INELIGIBLE
D
ECLINED
10. DATE OF LAST MED. RP T
. EVAL. FOR
DUAL. FOR
STAFF D
STATUS
PENDING
D
ENIED
11. CURRENT
NONAPPLICABLE
RANK
READY - CAT 1
READY - CAT 2
STANDBY ? CAT 3
RESERVE D
STATUS
RETIRED
SERVICE
12. ASSESSMENT DATE
13. PROF. TEST DATE
14. LANGUAGE APTITUDE TEST DATE
15. GRADE OF
POSITION INCUMBERED
16. NON-CIA EXPERIENCE (Including Military, COI, OSS, SSU
CIG)
,17. NON-CIA EDUCATION (Including Military, all training
prior to EOD, and all training since EOD except that
covered in item 19)
18. FOREIGN LANGUAGE ABILITIES
LANGUAGE
HOW ACQUIRED
PROFICIENCY
TESTED
19. AGENCY-SPONSORED TRAINING
20. CIA EMPLOYMENT HISTORY SINCE 18 SEPT 1947 (SF-50 & Military Orders) FIRST ASSIGNMENT AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS AND
PRINCIPAL DETAILS FOR LAST 10 YEARS.
EFFECTIVE DATE
POSITION TITLE & OCCUPATIONAL CODE
GRADE
ORGANIZATION & ORGAN. TITLE (If any)
LOCATION
FORM I 56 1080 da"t ( 4 )
25X1
Approved For Release 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000800030014-0
Figure 1 (Face)
 Approved For Rele 2002/11/12 : CIA-RDP8 14-0
HAND ) PE. JNNEL
25X1 NO. 29 November 1956
FACET :
Wh S SJORAlled In)
NAME (Last-First-Middle)
DATE OF
BIRTH
21. EVALUATIVE DATA
A. FITNESS REPORTS
FORM NO. 45. I NOV Ii5
EDITION OR LATER
RATING
LAST RATING ? DATES
OF PERIOD COVERED
RATING
LAST RATING ? DATES
OF PERIOD COVERED
RATING
LAST RATING ? DATES
OF PERIOD COVERED
PERFORMANCE ? SEC. C
'..
SUITABILITY ? SEC. D
POTENTIAL . SEC. G.I
B. ARE THERE REMAR