General guidelines for filling up the PAR form
The Performance Appraisal Report is an important document. It provides the basic and vital inputs for the further development of an officer. The appraisee, the Reporting Authority and the Reviewing Authority should, therefore, undertake the duty of filling up the form with a high sense of responsibility.
Performance appraisal should be used as a tool for human resource development. Reporting Officers should realize that the objective is to develop an officer so that he/she realizes his/her true potential. It is not meant to be a fault-finding process but a development tool. The Reporting Officer and the Reviewing Officer should not shy away from reporting shortcomings in performance, attitudes or overall personality of the officer reported upon.
The columns should be filled with due care and attention and after devoting adequate time. Any attempt to fill the report in a casual or superficial manner will be easily discernible to the higher authorities.
Although the actual documentation of performance appraisal is a year-end exercise, in order that it may be a tool for human resource development, the Reporting Officer and the appraisee should meet during the course of the year at regular intervals to review the performance and to take necessary corrective steps
The revised proforma for the annual performance appraisal comprises of 4 sections. The requirement under each section and the authority responsible for filling up these sections is indicated in the table below.
|Section No.||Information required||Authority responsible for filling up|
|I||Basic Information||Administration division/ Personnel Dept|
|III||Appraisal||Reporting officer/ Review Officer, if necessary|
Thus, the portions to be filled up by each authority are the following:-
|Administration Division/ Personnel Department||Section I|
|Reporting Officer||Section III|
|Review Officer||Sections IV and Section III (part), if required|
Guidelines for filling up the different components of the 4 sections have been given in the rest of this note. It would be most convenient if the appraisee fills up the form “on-line” by downloading the same from the web-site of the Ministry of Personnel, “persmin.nic.in”. After it is filled up, it could be printed and submitted to the reporting and review authorities, adding section I, which would have been filled up by the administration division/personnel department.
Instructions on filling up the different sections
This section should be filled up in the Administration Division/Personnel Deptt. Period of report could either be the entire reporting year, namely, from 1st of April to 31st March or a part of the year (exceeding 3 months). In case the period of report is a full year, it should be indicated accordingly for example, 2003-2004. In case the period of report is less than the entire year, specific start and end dates should be indicated, for example, 10th September 2003 – 31st March 2004.
Information on the present grade (pay-scale) as well as present post (actual designation and organization) needs to be given. In addition the date from which he/she has been on his/her present post needs to be mentioned.
In the table relating to reporting and review authorities the name and designation of the reporting and review authorities should be mentioned so that the appraisee is clear about whom he/she is required to send the report to.
The period of absence from duty, on leave, training, or for other reasons, should also be mentioned in this section in the table provided for the purpose. Details of the training attended should be mentioned under the remarks column of the table.
In Section II, the appraisee is first required to give brief description of his/her duties and responsibilities. This need not be very lengthy and would normally not exceed about 100 words. Ideally, this should be in bullet form.
Under the revised system of performance appraisal, all officers are required to develop a work plan for the year and agree upon the same with the reporting officer. This exercise is to be carried out at the beginning of the year, typically within the first 15 days. In case of a change in the reporting officer during the year, the work plan agreed with the previous reporting officer would continue to apply. The work plan agreed upon at the beginning of the year has to again be reviewed during the month of September/October as a mid year exercise. Based on This review the work plan may undergo some changes from that originally prepared.
The work plans, duly signed by the appraisee and the reporting officer have to be submitted to the review officer for his/her perusal and custody. The end of the year performance appraisal form provides for an assessment of the accomplishments vis-à-vis the work plan agreed at the commencement of the year and reviewed mid year. The appraisee is required to fill up the table provided by the purpose in Section-II.
It is not necessary that the work plan should be entirely quantitative in nature. While some assignments permit quantitative work targets to be fixed, others do not. Where quantitative targets are not possible, it would be adequate to indicate specific work proposed to be accomplished.
The sample of possible work plans for different positions has been developed and is placed at Annex-11-A. This may be used as a guide for officers to develop their own annual work plans. Ideally, individual work plans should be drawn from the annual action plan of the Ministry/deptt./organization. Aggregation of the individual work plans should really be the work plan of the Ministry/Deptt./Organization.
It is possible that an officer has accomplished certain major tasks which were not foreseen either at the commencement of the year or even during the mid year review. Examples of these may be relief and rescue work following a natural calamity or dealing with some other kind of emergency. Section II provides for such unforeseen work accomplished/underway to also be recorded by the appraisee to project his/her complete achievements during the year.
Section II also provides an opportunity for the officer to reflect upon his/her performance during the year and indicate one item which he/she thought was a significant contributions made by him/her during the year. It is not possible for any officer to make such significant contribution every year and hence this need not be attempted for each year of his/her service. Examples of such contribution may be the successful organization of a major event like the Kumbh Mela or successful conclusion of an activity that has been going on for a long time, or even successful dealing of an emergency (e.g. major earth quake/flood).
In all such cases, the officer should reflect upon and record factors that helped in his/her performance or hindered his/her performance. His/her reflection should also enable him/her to record his/her specific learning from the experience and possible systemic changes that could be made. Section II provides an opportunity for the officer to mention all of these.
This section also requires the appraisee to indicate specific areas in which he/she feels the need to upgrade skills and attend training programs. He/she should also mention the specific steps that he/she has taken or proposes to take to upgrade his/her skills in the identified area.
There is an increased emphasis on competency building in the new performance appraisal and career progression system. There would be a premium on competency and skill upgradation. Hence, all officers are advised, through a note in Section II, to keep the cadre controlling authority informed, atleast once in five years, of all educational and training programs attended, including the details of marks/grades secured in such programs. Similarly, all officers are advised to intimate details of professional papers published, with all relevant details. These would be taken into account in the future career progression and hence the need to keep the records of the cadre controlling authority updated.
In this context it is to be noted that officers would not normally be expected to publish papers during their first 12 years of service, when they would be in their field postings. Even at subsequent levels, publication of papers would, at best, be an ancillary activity and not something that takes up a substantial part of an officer’s time, who obviously has a responsibility to discharge. This information is being sought primarily to access the ability and willingness of an officer to think and research independently as well as structure his/her thoughts into a meaningful document.
Section II also requires the appraisee to record certain certificates. Apart from certifying submission of property returns, this section requires the officer to certify that he/she has undergone a medical check up within the last two years. Such a medical certificate is being insisted upon in the larger interest of the officer and the organization . The appraisee is also required to certify that he/she has agreed upon an annual work plan with all his/her immediate subordinate officers for whom he/she would be the reporting authority.
Another certificate is with regard to having submitted the annual performance report of all his/her subordinate officers for the period under report. In case the annual performance report of any subordinate officer could not be submitted, the reasons for the same need to be indicated in the table provided. This could be due to the concerned appraisee not having submitted his/her self-appraisal or some delay having taken place due to emergent work. In this connection, it is clarified that this certificate is required only in respect of those officers for whom the appraisee is the reporting authority.
This section relates to the actual appraisal and is to be recorded by the reporting authority. The reporting authority must first indicate the actual period, out of the year under report, during which the appraisee has served under him/her. In entering this information, the reporting authority may see information in Section I, where the date from which the appraisee has been in his/her present position would be available.
Section III then requires the reporting authority to comment on section II as filled out by the appraisee, and specifically state whether he/she agrees with the responses relating to the accomplishments. In case of disagreement the reporting authority should highlight the specific portions with which he/she is unable to agree and the reasons for such disagreement.
This section then requires the reporting officer to comment on the skill upgradation needs as identified by the officer. In case, the reporting officer agrees with the training needs indicated by the appraisee, he/she is required to indicate specific steps taken/proposed to be taken by him/her to enable the appraisee to have the skill upgraded. In case, he/she disagrees with the appraisee, he/she should record his/her reasons for such disagreement.
Thereafter, this section requires the reporting authority to record a numerical grade in respect of the workout put of the appraisee both in respect of the planned work as well as the unforeseen tasks. A numerical grade is also required in respect of the “quality” of the output. In doing so, the reporting authority should take into account the costs incurred (whether the appraisee has been cost conscious), the time taken and whether the laid down rules/procedures have been adhered to in accomplishing the tasks.
The reporting authority is also required to record a numerical grade in respect of certain personal attributes and functional competencies. As mentioned in the proforma, some of the attributes only relate to some of the posts and need not be given in respect of officers occupying different posts.
Section III requires the reporting officer to comment on the integrity of the appraisee. In recording remarks with regard to integrity, he/she need not limit him/herself only to matters relating to financial integrity but could also take into account the moral and intellectual integrity of the appraisee. The following procedure should be followed in filling up the column relating to integrity:
- If the Officers integrity is beyond doubt, it may be stated.
- If there is any doubt or suspicion, the column should be left blank and action taken as under
- A separate secret note should be recorded and followed up. A copy of the note should also be sent together with the Confidential Report to the next superior officer who will ensure that the follow up action is taken expeditiously. Where it is not possible either to certify the integrity or to record the secret note, the Reporting Officer should state either that he/she had not watched the officer’s work for sufficient time to form a definite judgement or that he/she has heard nothing against the officer, as the case may be.
- If, as a result of the follow up action, the doubts or suspicions are cleared, the officer’s integrity should be certified and an entry mode accordingly in the Confidential Report
- If the doubts or suspicions are confirmed, this fact should also be recorded and duly communicated to the officer concerned.
- If as a result of the follow up action, the doubts or suspicions are neither cleared nor confirmed, the officers conduct should be watched for a further period and thereafter action taken as indicated at (b) and (c) above.
(Ministry of Home Affairs OM No.51/4/64-Estt(A), dated 21.6.1965.)
The reporting authority is then required to comment on the attitude of the appraisee towards Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
The reporting officer is also required to record a descriptive pen-picture on the overall qualities of the appraisee and his/her performance. This need not exceed about 100 words and should try to cover qualities which the reporting officer feels have not been adequately covered through the specific attributes and the work assessment. The pen-picture is also meant to be a qualitative supplement to the quantitative assessments made earlier part of this section.
Finally, the reporting authority is required to record an overall grade. This should also be done on a scale of 1-10, with 1 referring to the lowest grade and 10 to the highest.
This section is to be filled up by the review officer and is self-explanatory. Again, as in the case of the reporting authority, the review authority is first required to indicate the time for which the appraisee has served under him/her.
Thereafter he/she is required to indicate if he/she agrees with the assessments made by the reporting officer. In case he/she does not he/she may record his/her own assessment against the work output or any of the attributes, in the column specifically provided for the purpose in the table in Section II. In case he/she agrees with the assessment he/she need not fill in the column meant for him/her in the attributes/work output tables.
The review officer is required to record a pen-picture, not exceeding about 100 words. Finally he/she is required to record an overall grade in the scale of 1-10.
At several places, numerical grades are to be awarded by reporting and review authorities. These should be on a scale of 1-10, where 1 refers to the lowest grade and 10 to the highest. It is expected that any grading of 1 or 2 (against work output or attributes or overall grade) would be adequately justified in the pen-picture by way of specific failures and similarly, any grade of 9 or 10 would be justified with respect to specific accomplishments. Grades of 1-2 or 9-10 are expected to be rare occurrences and hence the need to justify them. In awarding a numerical grade the reporting and review authorities should rate the officer against a larger population of his/her peers that may be currently working under them or would have worked under them in the past.
The new performance appraisal system is no longer a confidential process and the entire appraisal is now required to be revealed to the appraisee. This fits in with the primary objective of the performance appraisal being a tool for the development of the officer. As such, the final report, after review, is required to be communicated to the officer. For this purpose, a copy of the report should be sent to the appraisee, after the review officer has recorded his remarks and the overall grade. A record of having sent a copy of the report should be maintained for record.
The appraisee may submit a representation against any observation in his/her performance appraisal. It is expected that such a representation would only be against factual observations and not any subjective assessment of the reporting and review authority. In case a representation is submitted, it should be routed through the reporting and review officers to reach the cadre controlling authority. In case the reporting or review officers, being satisfied with the contentions made by the appraisee, wish to change any of the remarks or assessments, they may do so. In case they are not satisfied, they may give their observations, if any, on the representation of the appraisee. The cadre controlling authority would place the representation along-with any remarks made by the reporting and review authorities, on the representation, before a “Referral Board” to be specifically constituted for the purpose of deciding on such representations. The decision of the Referral Board would be final and it may result in the grades being amended in the light of any representation that the Board may accept.
In case the appraisee has alleged malafide against the reporting and/or review officers, the Referral Board would examine the claim. In case it is found that the allegation is without factual basis, the Referral Board would enter the finding and, if necessary, record an appropriate stricture in the PAR for that year. At the same time, if the claims are found to be true, it may be reflected appropriately in the report of the reporting/review officer.