• Attempted to provide a merit system to end favoritism.
• Required promotions by merit competition, but no centralized appraisal system was established.

• An appropriations act directed the U.S. Civil Service Commission (now the U.S. Office of Personnel Management) to establish a uniform efficiency rating system for all agencies.
  

• Resulted in establishment of a "graphic rating scale" in 1924, which was used until 1935.
• Was effective, but unpopular.
• Supervisor marked along a scale for each "service rendered."

The Civil Service Commission established the Uniform Efficiency Rating System by regulation, which was used until 1950.

• Factors were grouped under the headings Quality of Performance, Productiveness, and Qualifications.
• There were five rating levels for each of the three categories, and also five summary rating levels.

• Directed establishment of independent Boards of Review to decide rating appeals in each agency.
• Boards included the Civil Service Commission and employee representatives.

• Purpose was to identify the best and weakest employees and to improve supervisor-employee relations.
• Required the establishment of appraisal systems within all agencies with prior approval by the Civil Service Commission.
• Established three adjective summary rating levels: Outstanding, Satisfactory, and Unsatisfactory.
• Employees could still appeal ratings, but now through a statutory board of three members, one from an agency, one selected by employees, and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission.

• Authorized honorary recognition and cash payments for superior accomplishment, suggestions, inventions, special acts or services, or other personal efforts.

• Provided for training to improve performance and to prepare for future advancement.

• Required an "acceptable level of competence" determination for granting General Schedule within-grade increases.
• Provided for the denial of the within-grade increase when performance is below the acceptable level.
• Authorized an additional step increase for "high quality performance."

Agencies required to develop appraisal systems for all Federal employees.

• Office of Personnel Management approval of appraisal systems required.
• Appraisals must be based on job-related performance standards.
• Agencies must encourage employee participation in establishing performance standards.
• Appeal of appraisals outside an agency was eliminated.
• Results of the appraisal must be used as a basis for training, rewarding, reassigning, promoting, reducing in grade, retaining, and removing employees.
• Employees can be removed for unacceptable performance on one or more critical elements, but only after being provided an opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance. The standard of proof was reduced from preponderance of the evidence to substantial evidence.
• Reductions in grade and removals are appealable to the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Established a separate performance appraisal system for Senior Executive Service employees.

• One or more fully successful rating levels, a minimally satisfactory level, and an unsatisfactory level required.
• Agency Performance Review Boards to make recommendations to appointing officials on final ratings required.

Established performance-related pay authorities.

• Provided for performance awards for career executives; at least a Fully Successful rating required, and recommendation of the Performance Review Board.
• Provided for Senior Executive Service Meritorious (career) executive awards ($10,000 for sustained accomplishment over a period of years; limited to 5 percent of executives) and Distinguished (career) executives awards ($20,000 for sustained extraordinary accomplishment, limited to 1% of executives).
• Merit Pay established for supervisors and management officials in Grades GS 13-15 with funding for merit increases limited to what would have been paid as within-grade increases, quality step increases, and half of comparability adjustments (employees were guaranteed half of comparability adjustments only).

• Established a 5 percent minimum performance award for Senior Executive Service employees.
• Merit Pay System abolished and Performance Management and Recognition System (PMRS) established.
• PMRS Employees rated Fully Successful or higher guaranteed full comparability increases, with Minimally Successful getting half, and Unacceptable getting none.
• PMRS Employees guaranteed merit increases of specific amount based on their performance ratings and position in pay range for their grade level.
• Performance awards program for PMRS employees established, with a minimum funding level from .75 percent to 1.15 percent of estimated aggregate salaries over five years and a minimum performance award of 2 percent of employee's salary required for an Outstanding rating. Maximum award funding was set at 1.5 percent of estimated aggregate salaries.
• Performance appraisal revisions in PMRS include five summary rating levels required, no forced distributions of ratings allowed, and joint participation in setting standards required.

• Implemented legal provisions regarding general increases, merit increases, and performance awards.
• Established procedures for determining merit increases and performance awards for "unrateable" employees.
• Described pay-setting procedures when employees move between pay systems.
• Established minimum appraisal periods and procedures for rating employees who are detailed to other positions.
• Required higher level approval of ratings and performance-based personnel actions.

• Appraisal regulations for General Schedule and Prevailing Rate employees and for SES employees issued, which paralleled Performance Management and Recognition System appraisal regulations of 1985.

Regulatory pay-for-performance system established.

• Fully Successful rating required for within-grade increases.
• Outstanding rating required for quality step increases.
• Fully Successful rating required for career-ladder promotions.
• Performance award program required for General Schedule and Prevailing Rate employees.

• Revised merit increase amount for Fully Successful employees in the middle third of the pay range from one-third to one-half of a merit increase, to parallel step increases in the General Schedule.
• Set minimum performance awards funding at 1.15 percent of estimated aggregate salaries for duration of the extension.
• Allowed for the reassignment, removal, or reduction in grade of PMRS employees who did not attain a fully successful level of performance after being given an opportunity to do so.

Revised Senior Executive Service appraisal regulations.

• Permitted three to five summary rating levels. Must include an "Unsatisfactory," "Minimally Satisfactory" and "Fully Successful" level.
• Deleted requirement for rating period to end between June 30 and September 30.

• Allowed using a written statement of work objectives to establish performance requirements.
• Removed requirement for mandatory performance award for employees rated Outstanding and the accompanying 2 percent minimum award.

Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act

• Provided specific legislative authority for payment of rating-based cash awards to General Schedule employees like those authorized under the Performance Management and Recognition System.
• Provided authority to grant time off as an incentive award.

• Allowed summary ratings at 3, 4, or 5 levels but required agencies to include "Unacceptable," "Fully Successful," and "Outstanding" levels.

• Provided for orderly termination of the PMRS and payout of merit increases and performance awards based on October 1993 ratings.
• Provided for phased conversion of employees not on a step rate back to step rates based on specified personnel changes.
• Retained authority to pay employees at non-step rates until changes occur to place all employees on a step rate.

• Further decentralized the performance management program to allow agencies to develop programs to meet their individual needs and cultures.
• Established 8 permissible summary rating patterns allowing from two to five levels for summary ratings.
• Combined all award authorities in one part of the regulations, 5 CFR 451.
• Streamlined the appraisal system approval process.

• Allowed flexible crediting between 12 and 20 additional years of service retention credit for ratings of record given under different summary level patterns.
• Retained traditional 12-16-20 year crediting when all ratings of record being credited were given under a single summary level pattern.
• Revised credit averaging to use actual ratings of record given without "filling in the blanks" with presumed fully successful.
• Removed use of presumed fully successful ratings and replaced them with credit based on the modal rating when employee had no ratings of record.
• Provided for immediate or delayed implementation at agency discretion to allow for education, partnership, and automated system revision efforts.