Home Office circular 014 / 2003

PERFORMANCE AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS

Dear Chief Constable and Police Authority Clerk,

1. This Circular is about performance and development reviews (PDR) for all staff. It is intended to help forces and police authorities to implement the requirements of the White Paper, Policing a New Century that all staff, whether police officers or support staff, are entitled to an annual performance and development review.

2. This Circular should be taken in conjunction with HOC 18/2002: Promoting Effective Performance through the Training Plan and 42/2002: Implementing the National Competency Framework.

3. It should be drawn to the particular attention of the HR/Personnel Director, Training Director and BCU Commanders and then cascaded to all staff.

Background:
Achieving excellent staff performance

4. Implementation of the National Policing Plan and the White Paper, Policing a New Century, will involve the police service in significant cultural change. People will be the key to success in delivering the scale of change required. Guidance, developed by ACPO, agreed by the Police Training and Development Board and issued by the Home Office, is intended to help forces and police authorities improve their performance in Training and Development and to benchmark it against quality standards, such as Investors in People and EFQM.

5. Excellent staff performance relies on:

· Every member of staff being properly inducted into the organisation and their role in the organisation

· Every member of staff knowing what level of competence they are required to reach

· Every member of staff being offered support to achieve the required level of competence through training and development opportunities

· Every member of staff being supported through proper supervision by their line manager

· Every member of staff receiving regular honest and open reviews of their performance against defined outcomes

· Every member of staff being provided with opportunities for development.

6. This includes all staff working in a force: officers, police staff, special constables, and members of the Extended Police Family employed by the police authority.

7. Previous guidance (HOC 18/2002), of which this Circular forms part, has emphasised the importance for all staff of:

· a clear statement of the force’s aims and operational objectives, set out in the local policing plan;

· a clear statement of the resources which will be needed to deliver the service in the costed HR plan, including the extent to which training and development will contribute to meeting the objectives; and

· a clear statement of the levels of competence which staff should reach, as set out in the National Competency Framework.

8. This Circular gives further guidance on making performance and development reviews effective.

Effective PDR:
Benefits to the organisation

9. Done well, performance and development reviews

· ensure people know what the force aims to achieve and how they contribute to the overall objectives

· improve the performance of individuals by enabling them to develop towards required standards

· ensure all staff not performing to the required standard are assisted to achieve it

· improve force performance and identify whether the force’s objectives are being met

· enable training and development resources to be targeted more efficiently by identifying staff strengths and weaknesses

· increase efficiency in meeting operational requirements by matching skills with operational needs quickly

· promote continuous improvement in quality for the individual and for the organisation

· boost staff morale and motivation and improve retention as well as identify performance problems which need to be addressed

· provide a mechanism for communication with senior managers and demonstrate to staff that managers are committed to supporting their development.

PDR in the police service:
A new start

10. PDR has not been done particularly well in the police service. Reviews have not always been done regularly or to a consistent standard. Judgements about staff performance have not always been based on the available evidence. Where performance problems exist, they have not always been highlighted and addressed. Completing the form on time has sometimes assumed a greater importance than ensuring that the process is done in the interests of the member of staff. Line managers frequently see the annual round of PDR as an imposition and one that they are not well prepared to meet.

11. Overcoming these flaws in the new approach to PDR will be challenging. Staff are busy and line managers have a number of demands already upon them. However, the Police Training and Development Board is unanimous that the main purpose of PDR must be to improve force performance through staff. PDR needs to be honest and robust, yet developmental: staff need to know what is expected of them and to feel valued.

12. PDR is not a one-off event or annual ritual. It is a continuous process throughout the year. A member of staff and their line manager should meet regularly to discuss performance, anticipate or address any problems and identify development opportunities. Although a formal annual PDR meeting must take place, ongoing PDR actions do not always need to be formal interviews. The PDR process can also consist of brief conversations, interactions and observations noted in the Personal Development Portfolio or draft PDR, with appropriate notes made by the supervisor in their notebook.

13. Judgements about staff performance must be able to be substantiated. Examples of achievement should be collected over the year and each force will need to consider how the supporting evidence should be kept. Forces can choose to adopt “focused reporting”: that is, when the time of year for writing of reports is reached, provided a member of staff’s performance is competent, it will not be necessary to restate the evidence on the form. The evidence must be available, however, to validate the judgement made by the line manager. If a force opts for focused reporting, chief officers will need to ensure that PDRs are being done effectively (see para 16 below).

14. Staff are encouraged actively to participate in the PDR process, for example by prompting a dialogue with their line manager and reflecting on their own performance and learning needs by maintaining a Personal Development Portfolio.

15. A PDR system is only as effective as the people who operate it. The responsibility for ensuring all PDRs are undertaken should be cascaded throughout the force. Line managers need to be properly trained to carry out their responsibilities and to ensure that practice is consistent across the force. In particular, managers need to understand the PDR system, what competence means and how to assess it, and how to give and receive feedback throughout the year as well as in the performance discussion. Improvement of assessment skills is one of the priorities of the PTDB for 2003/2004. Line managers also need to be supported in taking action, where necessary, to address unsatisfactory performance when previous interventions have not resulted in improved performance.

16. Chief officers and BCU commanders should consider what mechanisms they will put in place to ensure that PDRs are completed and that quality is consistent across the force. Chief officers and BCU commanders should have a timetable of when PDR reports are due for their subordinates; and also when the reports of the subordinates of those they directly line manage (the “two-down” principle) are due and check that they are completed. They should dip-sample completed PDRs across the force; analyse the numbers of grievances; and check out teams where no significant development needs are identified.

17. Chief officers and BCU commanders should also ensure that proper linkages are made between PDRs and the Force Training Plan so that significant development needs identified across the force are reflected in the force’s training priorities for the coming year.

18. Police authorities should satisfy themselves that the senior management of the force is setting a lead in ensuring that performance and development reviews are in place for all staff and that the appropriate assessment processes are in place, adequately supervised and quality assured, in their force. Guidance is given about areas to probe in the APA’s People Matters: D2 on Assessment.

19. Forces and police authorities should also be aware of the requirement under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 to ensure that staff supervisions and appraisals are done accurately and monitored comprehensively and that the results of the findings are acted upon.

20. HMIC will include assessment of a force’s performance on PDR as part of its risk analysis for inspection.

PDR in the police service:
Where we are now

21. All forces should already be aware of the requirement in the White Paper that all staff working for the police service should have a formal performance and development review with their line manager annually. They will have developed a Performance and Development Plan to demonstrate how they will deliver performance and development reviews for every member of staff (HOC 18/2002).

22. All forces should be using the behavioural competencies of the National Competency Framework (NCF) by April 2003. They should have a plan for adopting the NCF into their HR processes, including their PDR process (HOC42/2002). We recognise that transition from one form of PDR to another will take time. Forces should be taking the opportunity where it exists to introduce the revised PDR as soon as possible, and no later than 1st April 2004.

23. Guidance on performance and development reviews of Chief Officers will be issued separately.

24. The High Potential Development Scheme aims to identify those with the potential to be future leaders of the police service and provide for the development of that potential. For those on the High Potential Development scheme, a framework for assessing participants’ performance and identifying development needs has already been issued and this framework should be used. The framework is in line with, but not identical to, the one set out here. For example, the HPD framework includes 360 degree feedback as an important element of that scheme. 360 degree feedback is not a requirement under the wider PDR scheme, but its use is recommended, particularly for senior managers.

25. PDR has been included as one of the Foundations for Change issued by the ACPO/APA National project for Best Value in Police Training. In line with Best Value principles, forces should be considering the potential for collaboration in PDR across their region; for example, by identifying and meeting skill gaps collaboratively, arranging training for line managers, or evaluating the effectiveness of PDR in improving staff performance.

What forces need to do now

26. If PDR is to be effective and consistent, the following elements must be included in each force’s approach to PDR. Forces should note these elements and consider how they will meet these requirements.

27. The requirements are that:

· The PDR must be based on the national competency framework

All forces must use the competencies contained within the NCF as the basis for assessing performance. The National Competency Framework is linked with National Occupational Standards which will provide the basis for accreditation and qualifications.

· Assessment must be made against activities and behaviours.

By using the Activities, forces can ensure that staff are assessed against their actual role, not just generic behaviours. Their use allows for greater objectivity and is more likely to highlight actual gaps in performance, leading to a more focused development plan.

Forces can choose the number of activities to include for assessment. For example, a force may wish to prioritise the four or five most important Core Responsibility Areas of a particular role for assessment. Another force may opt for all Activities required in a role to be assessed.

· The PDR must use a three-score rating: Exceptional, Competent, Not Yet Competent

Exceptional – A staff member who consistently exceeds the standards described within a specific Activity or the indicators described for a Behaviour. For example, the person would consistently take a lead on the activity or act as a role model.

Competent - An appraisee who consistently performs to the standards described within a specific Activity or the indicators described for a Behaviour.

Not Yet Competent – A member of staff who is not consistently performing to the standards described within a specific Activity or the indicators described for a Behaviour. Development may be required because the person is new to their role or may have undertaken additional Activities. In some circumstances, this rating may apply to an appraisee who is not performing despite development opportunities.


· The PDR must include a development plan as an integral component.

Even where a member of staff has been identified as competent or exceptional in the role they are performing, they continue to merit development.

Where performance is rated at not yet competent, the line manager must discuss with the staff member the relevant areas for development. These will specifically relate to the role the staff member is currently performing. Such development actions should be clearly outlined on the PDR form, with timescales wherever possible.

· The PDR process should be on an annual cycle.

Every member of staff should have a PDR record completed each year. It is the responsibility of each force to decide when the anniversary for the PDR should be triggered and to include that in their Performance Review Development Plan. Some forces may choose to hold the review each year around the date on which a member of staff joined. For others, this is not practicable. If possible, line managers should consider not having the anniversary for all those they supervise at the same time.

28. It is open to forces to adopt focused reporting if they wish. Focused reporting means that, when the formal PDR takes place, if the appraisee and the manager agree that the appraisee is fully competent in any aspect of their role, the line manager is able to tick the relevant rating box and provide no written evidence for the activity or behaviour on the PDR form. Evidence for each area of the review MUST be collected by the line manager and the staff member throughout the review period. Where a member of staff is rated as exceptional or not yet competent during the review period, evidence MUST be provided on the form. If the line manager and staff member are in disagreement over any rating, evidence needs to be included within the corresponding section of the PDR form to justify the rating provided by the line manager.

29. An assessment of attendance is included as an option for forces to reflect the national focus on this issue. The majority of staff will score well on this rating and it is therefore an opportunity for line managers formally to recognise the member of staff’s commitment to achieving high levels of attendance. Relationship to Competence Related Threshold Payments

30. Members of the federated ranks who have spent a year at the top of their salary scale are entitled to apply for the competence related threshold payment. In order to get the payment, they will have to demonstrate high professional competence against four national standards. The details of the competence related threshold payment scheme were agreed by the Police Negotiating Board on 30 September 2002. The criteria for assessing high professional competence are based on the generic rank profiles in the National Competency Framework to ensure there is consistency in definitions of competence.

31. There are difficulties at present in combining the competence related threshold payment scheme with the PDR although forces may wish to move towards a position where the two can be done together, for ease of administration. This is a matter for the discretion of forces.


Recommended format

32. An approach to PDR in the example format of Patrol Constable (taken from the NCF Version 4: 2002) is attached at Annex A. This format covers all the key elements of PDR which forces are required to adopt. Its use is therefore highly recommended.

33. The recommended PDR format can be customised by forces, for example with their crest, although each of the headings should remain.

34. The new form will be included in an electronic version to be issued by the PSSO. For further advice, contact Zoe Scott (Development Officer) at the PSSO: zoe.scott@psso.co.uk

Benefits of the new scheme

35. The new PDR approach offers a number of advantages over the current system in that it

· allows for ongoing evidence gathering and ensures staff are assessed against their actual role not just generic behaviours

· is estimated that the many current appraisal processes take an average of 4 hours actual writing time whereas the proposed process has been timed at less than 1 hours writing time (in trials in the MPS and Cleveland).

· focuses on development and could allow for more honesty by line managers

· can be as simple or as detailed as required depending on the need

· supports leadership in that it puts an onus on line managers to know how their staff perform and may highlight the less effective managers. It requires the line manager to make a judgement but one that is not mechanistic and allows for discretion.

· allows for objectives to be linked to the Policing Plan

· allows for ongoing training needs assessment to be made, locally and organisationally and supports effective management of that development requirement.

· does not mechanistically dictate the outcome of other HR processes such as selection but can inform them.

· can provide, with the right IT support, useful management information





Sue Martin
Police Leadership and Powers Unit
March 2003