HomeHuman ResourcesCity Policy • Section

Layton City Policy

Back To Title List | Chapter List | Section List

3701 - Performance Evaluations


The City uses the Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) developed by JCM Consulting for performance evaluations.

Regular (full-time and part-time) employees should be evaluated quarterly while in probationary status (see 3107), and annually thereafter.  The annual evaluation can be used as one of the quarterly evaluations.

Newly hired entry-level Police Officers that attend the academy do not receive a performance evaluation for time (three months) spent there.  Their evaluation period begins after they have completed the academy; hence, they receive three quarterly evaluations during their first year instead of four.

Employees taking FMLA leave are exempt from performance or productivity-based evaluation during the specific time for which FMLA leave was utilized.

General Procedures

1.      Within 30 days of the beginning of the evaluation period, or of being hired, the supervisor should carefully review the following with each employee:

·         Job duties, responsibilities, operating procedures, performance standards (work quality and quantity), and specific performance objectives (SPOs) for the position. (Note that department directors should review and approve SPOs and assigned values or scores before the value or score is presented to the employee to ensure that scores for written objectives are appropriate.);

·        The City’s mission, values, and expectations;

·        The performance evaluation process, including a printed chart showing the weights of each of the factors they will be evaluated on.

2.      Throughout the year, the supervisor should observe the employee’s performance both in areas needing improvement as well as in areas showing progress.  Significant Incident Records (SIRs) should be created within the PEP program to document performance when appropriate.  The supervisor should provide guidance, assistance, advice, commendation, and when necessary, warning as observation of performance indicates.

3.      Probationary employees should be evaluated quarterly.  Supervisors should notify human resources so that quarterly evaluations are released for completion in a timely manner.  Evaluations should be completed just as they are for annual evaluations..  Signed originals of quarterly evaluations must be forwarded to the human resources department for the Personnel File.

·         On or about March 20th of each year, the human resources division will release evaluations on the network.   Supervisors should complete evaluations for each of their employees no later than the identified date set on the Evaluation Schedule.  In addition, each employee should complete his or her self-evaluation by this same date.  Scores other than a 3.0 on both the supervisor evaluation and the employee self-evaluation require supporting documentation to justify the score.  Since it is presently not possible to enter self-evaluation comments in the PEP System, supporting documentation for self-evaluations should be done on paper and submitted by each employee to their supervisor.

4.      During the latter part of April, each department director will do a preliminary review of department evaluations prior to supervisors discussing them with employees.  The purpose of this review is for the department director to confirm, to the best of his/her knowledge, that scores and comments given by supervisors are consistent and accurate.  Department directors will specifically verify that SIRs and/or comments reasonably justify scores other than a “3”. Discrepancies will be referred back to the supervisor for resolution. Upon completing the preliminary review, the department director will initial the evaluation.  In addition, human resources will do an on-line preliminary review or “trial-run” of randomly selected evaluations.  Human resources will not attempt to judge performance, but merely identify any inconsistencies between scores and documentation in an effort to promote consistency in scoring throughout the City. Discrepancies will be referred to the affected department director  for resolution.

5.      After the department director and human resources have completed the preliminary review, normally on or about June 1st, supervisors should schedule an interview with individual employees to review and discuss their evaluation.  The supervisor should finalize the rating during this interview.  The supervisor may propose a change in score if after discussion with the employee, he/she believes additional circumstances should have been taken into consideration.  Department directors must approve any changes to scores.

Finally, evaluations should be   (1) signed by the employee and supervisor, (2) copied and given to the employee, and (3) sent (originals) to the Human Resources Office for the personnel file. This process should be completed by June 15th.  Upon signing the evaluation, employees should indicate whether they agree or disagree with the evaluation.  If they disagree, they should indicate whether they want to appeal.  Employees wishing to appeal their performance evaluation should be instructed to follow the steps in policy 3802 entitled “Appeals/Grievance Procedures”.

Defining the Evaluation Tool

PEP provides flexibility and allows department directors latitude in defining the evaluation tool for various positions.   This flexibility is useful to more closely define expectations for specific positions, however it is also important that there be an appropriate level of consistency across all city positions to ensure that the City’s mission, values and expectations are being met.  The following guidelines are established to maintain this consistency:

1.      All capped factors have a required weight, while other factors have a minimum weight.

2.      The City Manager approves core factors with weights for non-supervisory and supervisory positions,


Core Factors for Non-Supervisors                         Minimum Weights

Customer Service                                                                         8%

Dependability                                                                              10%

Initiative                                                                                        10%

Policy Knowledge Test                                                                 1%

Professionalism                                                                           10%

Quality of Work                                                                             10%

Quantity of Work                                                                             7%

Integrity  (Capped at 3)                                      Weight must be 4% for all employees

Policy Conformance except driving (Capped at 3) Weight must be 4% for all employees

Core Factors for Supervisors                                 Minimum Weights

Customer Service                                                                           5%

Dependability                                                                                  7%

Initiative                                                                                            6%

Policy Knowledge Test                                                                   1%

Professionalism                                                                               6%

Quality of Work                                                                                 7%

Quantity of Work                                                                               5%

Approachable                                                                                   4%

Decision Making                                                                               5%

Leadership/Motivation                                                                      5%

Performance Evaluation                                                                   5%

Planning/Organizing                                                                          4%

Integrity (Capped at 3)                                               Set weight to 4% for all employees

Policy Conformance except driving (Capped at 3)         Set weight to 4% for all employees

3.      Mandatory elective factor(s) are selected by the City Manager, along with weights for each. 

Mandatory elective factors include:                        Minimum Weight                      

Safety for EEs required to drive and work in safety sensitive positions (Capped at 3)

Set weight to 3% for all employees

Safety Supervision for EEs who supervise those who drive and/or work in safety sensitive positions (Capped at 3)

Set weight to 3% for all employees 

4.      Other elective factors are optional and may be selected for use by the respective department director along with a corresponding weight such that core factors are given at least the minimum weights indicated above, and the total of all weights equals 100%. 

5.      Performance factors and weights between similar jobs within a department should be uniform.

6.      The City Manager should review changes to factor definitions or the creation of new factors and their definitions.  Factor levels should be written to reflect performance as follows:  1 = Unsatisfactory, 2= Needs Improvement, 3 = Competent / Solid, Sound Performance, 4 = Exceeds Expectations Regularly, and 5 = Constantly Outstanding.  Effective July 1, 2007, certain factor definitions have been revised for clarification purposes.  A list of revisions can be found at the end of this document.

7.      Specific Performance Objectives (SPOs) or goals should be clearly defined within factors where appropriate.

8.      Significant Incident Records (SIRs) should be entered by the supervisor throughout the year to document performance.

Scoring Guidelines

·         Evaluation scoring should reflect performance as follows:

1        =  Unsatisfactory

2        =  Needs Improvement

3        =  Competent / Solid, Sound Performance

4        =  Exceeds Expectations Regularly

5        =  Constantly Outstanding

·         Scoring may be made in increments of tenths of a point

·         All scores by evaluators other than a “3.0” should be documented with SIR(s) or notes.

·         All self-evaluation scores other than a “3.0” should be accompanied by employee documentation that supports the scores given.  Since this documentation cannot be currently entered into the PEP System, employees are required to submit it in writing to their supervisor separately.

Grounds for Disciplinary Action

Regardless of the average evaluation score, a score of “1.9” or less for any factor may constitute grounds for immediate disciplinary action.  A score of “2.0 to 2.5” for any factor may constitute grounds for disciplinary action if the employee does not show substantial improvement, as determined by the department director, within 90 days from the date of the evaluation.  An SPO with written expectations for improvement should be generated for any factor receiving a score of 2.5 or less.

Department directors need not wait for the evaluation process to be completed before taking needed disciplinary action.

Determining Merit Increase for Regular Employees

Regular employees may receive a merit increase in proportion to their evaluation score and salary rate based on the total amount of funding available for merit increases approved by the City. 

Merit increases, when funded and approved by the City, will be effective July 1st of the following fiscal year in accordance with the following guidelines:

1.      Employees hired or promoted on or between July 1st and December 31st may be eligible for a full merit increase in their current position.

2.      Employees hired on or between January 1st and April 30th may be eligible for a merit increase based on the percentage of the year they worked rounded to the first day of the nearest full calendar month.  Employees hired during the months of May and June would not require a performance evaluation and are not eligible to receive a merit increase.

·         Example 2.1:  An employee is hired on March 18th. Round to the first day of the nearest calendar month, which is April 1st.  For purposes of receiving a merit increase, this employee would be considered to have worked 3 months or 25% of the fiscal year; therefore the employee would be eligible to receive 25% of an approved merit increase.

·         Example 2.2:  An employee is hired on January 12th. Round to the first day of the nearest calendar month, which is January 1st.  For purposes of receiving a merit increase, this employee would be considered to have worked six months, or 50% of the fiscal year, therefore the employee would be eligible to receive 50% of an approved merit increase. 

·         Example 2.3:  An employee is hired on May 5th.  Since he has less than two full months with the City in the fiscal year, an annual performance evaluation is not necessary and he is not eligible for a merit increase.

3.      Employees transferred or promoted on or between January 1st and  April 30th may be eligible to receive an approved merit increase effective July 1st based on combining salary rates from both positions held, proportionate to how long the employee worked in each position rounded to the first day of the nearest calendar month.   An employee promoted during the months of May and June may be eligible for a full year merit increase based on the salary in the old position.

·         Example 3.1: An employee is promoted on March 18th and is evaluated on the closest quarterly evaluation to June 30th in the latter position.  Round to the first day of the nearest calendar month, which is April 1st.  The employee would be considered to have spent 75% of the year in the former position, and 25% of the year in the latter position. Therefore the employee would be eligible to receive 75% of an approved merit increase based on salary in the former position, and 25% on that of the latter position.

·         Example 3.2: A Police Officer II is promoted to a Police Officer III on February 11th.  Since the promotion was effective February 11th, round to the first day of the nearest calendar month, which is February 1st.  The employee would be considered to have spent 7 months, or 58% of the year in the former position, and 5 months, or 42% of the year in the latter position.  Therefore the officer would be eligible to receive 58% of an approved merit increase based on salary in the former position, and 42% on that of the latter position.

4.      Employees placed on disciplinary probation during the year being evaluated will have any approved merit increase delayed by an amount of time equal to the length of the probationary period. 

·         Example 4.1:  An employee is placed on probation for 3 months from January 10 to April 10, and still qualifies for an approved merit increase based on the evaluation score.  The increase would go into effect October 1st instead of July 1st.

5.      Salaries shall not be increased above the established salary range for the position.  Full-time regular employees who are ineligible for a merit increase because they are at the top of their salary range may be eligible to receive a one-time bonus based on evaluation score and funds made available by the City. Part-time regular employees who qualify for a one-time bonus may receive half the amount a full-time regular employee would receive.

6.      In some cases, employees may be so near the top of the salary range that they are unable to receive all of the merit increase before they top out.  In these cases, the employee may be eligible for an approved bonus less the amount received toward the merit increase for the year.

·         Example 6.1: A full-time regular employee is in a position with a salary range from $9.56 to $13.39 per hour.  Her current salary is $13.30 per hour.  If her approved merit increase was greater than $0.09 she would not be eligible to receive the entire merit increase because that would put her above the top of the range.  The amount to be received during the year based on the merit increase is $187.20 ($0.09 x 2080 hrs). Any bonus she may be eligible for would be reduced by the $187.20 received toward the merit increase.

·         Example 6.2: A full-time regular employee is in a position with a salary range from $9.56 to $13.39 per hour.  Her current salary is $13.00 per hour.   Based on her evaluation score and amounts funded for merit increases by the City, assume she receives a merit increase of  $0.47 per hour.  She would not be eligible to receive this entire increase because that would put her above the top of her range.  She would only be eligible to receive an increase of $0.39 per hour for an hourly rate of $13.39.   Assuming the approved bonus amount was $400, she would not be eligible for any of it because the amount she received from the merit increase ($0.39 x 2080 hrs = $811.20) exceeds the amount of the available bonus ($400).

7.      Annual leave, sick leave, and approved leave without pay (including FMLA leave) will not be deducted in calculating the percentage of the year an employee worked at a particular wage or in a particular position.

·         Example 7.1:  Assume the same facts in Example 3.3, except the officer takes off 3 months of FMLA leave without pay between October 1st and December 31st, The officer’s merit increase would still be the same as in Example 3.3 despite the fact the officer was off on FMLA leave for 3 months.

Supervisor Training

Each year, Human Resources provides training to new supervisors in performance evaluation policy and procedures.  Department directors may send other supervisors to this training as a refresher.


Enacted, 7/22/1993
Amended, 4/5/1995
Amended, 1/1/1996
Amended, 12/9/1993, Previous Policy,
Amended, 2/12/1996, Previous Policy,
Amended, 3/28/2001, Previous Policy,
Amended, 2Minor Edit, 1/6/2004
Amended, 1/8/2004, Previous Policy 3701
Minor Edit, 2/23/2004
Amended, 8/18/2004, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 2/14/2006, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 3/13/2006, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 7/26/2007, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 12/19/2007, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 8/19/2008, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 12/18/2008, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 9/16/2010, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 11/25/2014, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 7/29/2015, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 8/10/2015, Previous Policy 3701
Amended, 7/26/2016, Previous Policy 3701