http://www.cc.cec/home/admref/cdr/documentation_en.html .

• The staff report is now called the "Career development report" (CDR).
• The first appraisal exercise will take place in the first quarter of 2003. All reports must be completed by 15 March 2003.
• You will be appraised for the period from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002. This 18-month period is called the "reference period" in the rest of this document.
• During the appraisal, each official⁽²⁾ will be given an overall mark between 0 and 20. This mark will be made up as follows : a mark measuring the official’s performance (between 0 and 10), a mark measuring the official’s skills ("competencies") (between 0 and 6) and a mark measuring the official’s conduct (between 0 and 4).
• This mark out of 20 will then be converted into "merit points", used for promotion purposes.
  For most officials the number of merit points will correspond to the overall appraisal mark. For example, an official in receipt of an overall mark of 14 out of 20 will receive 14 merit points.
• The main exceptions to this simple rule are:

1. Probationary officials: they are also appraised by the CDR⁽³⁾ but the merit points will be calculated in proportion to the number of months they are in active service. For example, a probationary official receives a mark of 15 out of 20. He entered service on 1 January 2002 (and so worked two thirds of the reference period: 12 months out of 18). He will thus receive 2/3 of 15, i.e. 10 merit points.
2. Officials who have had leave on personal grounds (CCP) or who were invalided out during part of the reference period: the merit points will be calculated in proportion to the number of months in active service.
   For example, an official in receipt of a mark of 14 out of 20 but who spent half the period on CCP (9 months out of the 18) will receive only half the merit points: i.e. 7 instead of 14.
3. Officials on secondment at their own request during part of the reference period: the merit points will be calculated in proportion to their active service in the Commission but they will also receive merit points for their time on secondment in accordance with the following rule: 18 months on secondment provide 10 merit points (the pro-rata calculation applies in the case of fractions of the reference period).
   
   For example, an official with a mark of 14 out of 20 who was on secondment at his or her own request for half the period (9 months out of the 18) will receive on the one hand 7 points from the appraisal (1/2 of 14) and a further 5 points in respect of the 9 months on secondment (1/2 of 10), giving a total of 7 + 5 = 12 merit points

• On the other hand, officials on secondment in the interest of the service are not considered to be exceptions to the rule: the CDR is prepared for them in their host organisation and the mark is converted into merit points in accordance with the normal rules applying.

• The CDR form

• The CDR form is to be used electronically as part of a computer tool currently being developed. The content of the form was already presented at the first training module in the spring and summer of this year. You can see it on the reform website: http://www.cc.cec/home/admref/cdr/documentation_en.html or alternatively in Annex II to the General Implementing Provisions.

• The career development reports will be filled in directly on screen as far as possible and then stored in the new computerised staff management system (SysPer2). Where it is not possible to fill the form in electronically (e.g. in the case of Commission delegations that are not linked to SysPer2), the forms will be filled in on paper and encoded later.
• Pending the introduction of the computer application, a paper version of the form (in Word) very similar to the electronic version will shortly be sent to all Human Resources Managers.

• How are performance, skills and conduct appraised?

• Performance is appraised on a scale of 0 to 10. As the reporting officer and appraisee have not set objectives in advance this time around, the reporting officer will make a general judgement of the tasks actually carried out by the official in the reference period.
• Skills and conduct are respectively appraised on scales of 0 to 6 and 0 to 4. As the reporting officer and appraisee have not listed the skills and other requirements required for the post this time around, the reporting officer will base his or her appraisal on the standard "competency and conduct framework". You will find these documents on the IntraComm reform site at:  http://www.cc.cec/home/admref/cdr/documentation_en.html

• Who is the reporting officer? Who is the countersigning officer?

• For the transitional exercise (2001-02), the reporting officer is the official’s immediate superior on 31 December 2002. The countersigning officer is the reporting officer’s immediate superior on 31 December 2002.
• The reporting officer for most officials is the head of unit and the countersigning officer is the Director. In units of 20 officials or more, the head of unit may delegate the job of appraising staff to A grade colleagues. They can appraise the B, C and D grade officials they manage and supervise with a certain amount of autonomy⁽⁴⁾. In such cases the countersigning officer is the head of unit.
  In the case of officials answering directly to a Director (secretaries, assistants, advisers, heads of unit, etc.) the reporting officer is the Director and the countersigning officer is most often the Director-General or the Deputy Director-General. In the case of officials answering directly to a Director-General (secretaries, assistants, advisers, heads of unit, etc.) that person is both the reporting officer and countersigning officer in one.
• If an official has had several direct hierarchical superiors during the reference period, the reporting officer and countersigning officer will still be the direct superiors in place on 31 December 2002. They will issue the overall mark (out of 20) for the official in question.
  That said, reporting officers must consult their predecessors. This requirement covers all officials who were the interested party’s direct superiors for at least three months in the reference period. This consultation allows reporting officers to get an idea of the official’s work, skills and conduct in the months before he or she worked for the reporting officer. Reporting and countersigning officers must take the opinions of the previous hierarchical superiors into account, but the latter are not entitled to award points.
• In practice, hierarchical superiors that are not an official’s reporting officer on 31 December 2002 can already (if they wish and without waiting to be asked) put down their opinions on a blank sheet of paper or on an old/new form, with a view to informing the reporting officers involved.
• The reporting officer will transcribe onto the electronic form the opinions/comments resulting from the above consultations, along with their date and author, in a section (or "box") created for this purpose. Appraisees must however receive a copy of the original paper version. The original will be placed in the official’s personal file.

• Target average mark and other guides for awarding merit points

• The Directorates-General are invited to appraise their staff in line with an average of 14 out of 20 (called the ‘target average mark’). This average of 14 points must be adhered to across all grades in each Directorate-General.
• The Directorates-General that achieve an average above 15 for a particular grade will be penalised. This involves reducing the quota of priority points available to that DG for the grade and promotions exercise in question.
  
  Let us take as an example a Directorate-General with 100 grade B2 officials. Let us imagine that the average for the B2 appraisals in this DG is 16. The DG, instead of receiving a quota of 250 priority points for its B2 staff (100 x 2.5) would receive a budget of 50 priority points (250 - a penalty of 200). The penalty corresponds to the merit points that the DG distributed over and above those that it should have distributed had it observed the average, i.e. 100 x (16-14).
• Nevertheless, a Directorate-General whose average is over 15 (for a given grade) can apply to the Promotions Committee to annul or reduce the penalty where valid reasons are given for exceeding the average.
• In addition to observing the target average mark of 14, the Directorates-General are recommended to award officials deserving of normal promotion a mark between 12 and 16, those deserving rapid promotion a mark between 17 and 20 and those in slow careers a mark of either 10 or 11. Marks below 10 mean that the person concerned has to improve performance-wise and promotion is out of the question for that particular exercise.
• If we look at how promotions have been done in the past, we see that there was overall an overall promotions distribution corresponding approximately to 15% on a fast career path, 75% on a normal career path and 10% on a slow career path. It follows from this that a mark between 17 and 20 will be given to roughly 15% of officials, a mark between 12 and 16 to 75% and a mark of 10 or 11 to about 10%.

• CDR Appraisal Guide

In addition to the General Implementing Provisions, there is a document on the reform site entitled "Appraisal Guide" (Career Development Review System - Guidance) ( http://www.cc.cec/home/admref/cdr/index_en.html ). This document is designed to help reporting officers to evaluate performance, set objectives, interpret the competency and conduct framework and carry out the appraisal interview. Those being appraised can also read this document if they want to understand how the new appraisal system works.

• Training timetable

All those being appraised have in principle attended the first training module, which explained the principles on which the career development report is based. They are now being invited to attend module 4, which prepares them for their self-assessment and the appraisal interview.
All reporting and countersigning officers have in principle attended module 2 (which explained objective-setting) and they are currently attending module 3, which explains how to set appraisal standards. They will then be invited to attend module 5, which is also designed to prepare them for the appraisal dialogue with their staff and for writing up the career development reports.

Given below is a timetable of the stages for implementing the new system in each DG in this transitional period. The dates are only approximate. The timetable also takes account of an individual who exhausts all appeal and review options relating to his or her report.

Legend: Appraisee = A Reporting officer = RO Countersigning officer = CO Hierarchical superiors consulted = C Human resources manager = HRM

• Special arrangements

Special arrangements to appraise officials on secondment as staff representatives and those who are assigned to the External Relations Service have been prepared and will shortly be adopted.

• Further information

You can get further information from the Human Resources Managers in each Directorate-General and from the relevant unit in DG ADMIN⁽⁵⁾.

_______________________

Footnotes

⁽¹⁾Other than grades A1 and A2

⁽²⁾The term "official" also covers here temporary agents, mutatis mutandis.

⁽³⁾The end of probation report must also be drawn up and if not already done the page intended for this purpose in the new form should be used.

⁽⁴⁾Officials so appointed must attend the training for reporting officers.

⁽⁵⁾Secretariat of Unit ADMIN.A.6, Mrs Bosendorf, tel. : 2955615