Download
rpes an overview for new researchers n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
RPES… An Overview for New Researchers PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
RPES… An Overview for New Researchers

RPES… An Overview for New Researchers

450 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

RPES… An Overview for New Researchers

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. RPES… An Overviewfor New Researchers

  2. RPES… • …or Research Position Evaluation System, is the mechanism by which your grade will be determined as an ARS research scientist • …affords a unique opportunity for noncompetitive advancement in your career with ARS

  3. Research Position Classification • Grading criteria are established in an official Federal standard – the OPM Research Grade Evaluation Guide (RGEG) • Underlying concept is “impact of the person in the job” • Assesses your career-long documented contributions, and resultant stature and recognition, with a definite eye on recency

  4. Periodic Classification Review • Mandatory cyclic review based on current grade • GS-12 and below, every 3 years • GS-13, every 4 years • GS-14 and -15, every 5 years • Exceptions which Area Director can approve • Early Review • Delayed Review • Reevaluation • Poor Performers

  5. Key Concepts (I) • Impact is the core value of RPES • Quality…not quantity • Answer the question, “So what?” • Review by panel of peer scientists…not management • Determination… panels decide, not recommend • A delegation unique in the Federal Government

  6. Key Concepts (II) • Documented… a complete and accurate case writeup with solidexhibits is crucial • Detailed guidance is provided in Manual 431.3-ARS (Part I) • Recency… scientists are not tenured in grade • Failure to maintain levels of impact, stature, and recognition causes grade maintenance difficulties

  7. Factor 1… 2… 3… 4! Factor 4 is the key to the RGEG. It implements “person-in-the-job” and asks several probing questions: • What has the scientist done, contributed, accomplished… especially recently (since last review)? • How and where is the work documented?

  8. Factor 1… 2… 3… 4! (cont’d) • Who says the work is important? Howare they using results? • Whyis the work important (i.e., “so what”?) • Who is consulting with/invitingthe scientist? • What kind of recognition (awards, grants, etc.) is the scientist garnering because of the work… and from whom?

  9. Quality vs Quantity (I) • Impact of accomplishments and resultant stature/recognition are the core values of RPES • Numbers are important, but only in terms of number of quality accomplishments… not mere number of publications • Impact is measured in terms of the number of quality contributions over an entire career…with a definite eye toward recency

  10. Quality vs Quantity (II) • To achieve maximum RPES credit, accomplish-ments must demonstrate impact in terms of… • Scientific excellence, and/or • Pertinence (solve problem or save $$$$) • Factor 4 therefore drives RGEG and RPES • Explain accomplishments, and claim/document their impact in Element A • Illustrate resultant stature and recognition in Elements B and C

  11. Time… is also an important RGEG component, because it affects impact, stature, and recognition (ISR). • It takes time to build ISR • It takes time to maintain ISR • ISR will erode over time if not tended to

  12. All Activity is not Created Equal (I) There are several degrees of activity: • Activity which advances a career • Because of its impact • Activity which maintains a career • Justifies current grade level • Activity which limits or diminishes a career • Mundane, insignificant or undirected • Lower relative level of contribution/impact than earlier work

  13. All Activity is not Created Equal (II) • Inactivity is the surest way to lose • Researchers are not “tenured in grade” • Must “keep running just to stay in place” • Must perform research to remain Cat 1 • May do other types of work in addition • But, must personally perform research

  14. What RPES Panels Look For • Activity • Accomplishments and contributions • Balance • Research • Technology Transfer • Special assignments • Other • Impact • Useful and significant work • Recency • Current work • Work since last review

  15. Not A Promotion System • Purpose is to ensure positions are properly graded • Promotion is one of severalpossible outcomes • Has averaged 42-48% of all decisions in recent years • Do not expect to be promoted just because you are being reviewed

  16. NotPerformance Appraisal • RPES is a position classification process, and is not the same as performance appraisal • Your performance is appraised annually, measured against standards in your performance plan; the appraisal is the basis for various HR actions (awards, bonuses, within-grade increases, retention in the Federal service, etc.) • RPES evaluates your position on a cyclic basis against RGEG criteria; panel decisions determine grade (and salary range)

  17. Closing Thoughts (I) • RPES evaluates what is… not what “could have been” or “should have been” or “might be” • RPES is not a career management system • Panel reports will not tell you how to get promoted next time

  18. Closing Thoughts (II) • RPES is a dynamic system, always under review • RPES Advisory Committee • Find your current Area rep at <www.afm.ars.usda.gov/rpes/adv-01.htm> • Prepare your case writeup concisely, and choose exhibits wisely

  19. Information Resources • RPES Home Page • <www.afm.ars.usda.gov/rpes> Research Position Evaluation Staff contacts • BA, MSA, NAA, and SAA – Dana Lamberti • MWA, NPA, PWA, SPA, and OIRP - Pat Humphrey • Each Area Office has a designated RPES contact • Check out the other online shows in this series