All News

Sizing up SES and pay-for-performance

Best when aligned with mission

Federal News Network Staff

December 22, 2008 2:51 pm

2 min read

By Max Cacas
FederalNewsRadio

One of the top priorities of the Bush Administration over the last eight years has been expanding the use of pay-for-performance as a means of rewarding top performing federal workers. But how successful are the agencies in implementing the plan?

Robert Goldenkoff is author of a new Government Accountability Office study conducted for Senators Akaka (Hawaii), Voinovich (Ohio), and Dorgan (North Dakota), as part of the oversight of a 2003 law allowing agencies to increase their SES pay caps if they meet certain criteria set by the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget.

“The criteria include linking individual performance to agency results,” he said in a recent interview, “making meaningful distinctions in SES performance, and building in appropriate safeguards.”

Goldenknoff’s study looked at six federal agencies: the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Departments of State, Energy, Treasury and Defense; and the U.S. Agency for International Development.

“Overall,” he says, “we found some very positive things going on. Overall, agencies are meeting OPM’s re-certification criteria. However, at USAID, the agency was not providing individual performance data to officials responsible for SES for performance data decisions in a timely way.

Goldenkoff says that “we’ve been telling agencies for years that there’s a ‘line of sight’ between an agency and its workers when there is a straight line between that worker and the agency’s responsilbilities. He also says that a key to success in pay for performance at most agencies is making sure the program is tied in with the mission of the agencies.

Goldenkofff adds that the key is for agencies to be more clear to both workers and their supervisors about what is expected of them in any pay-for-performance program.

On the Web:
GAO Full Report”

GAO Report