Conversion Decision

There is currently no requirement to use CHRS to record review data, however, when a poll was taken of campuses most indicated they want to use it.

Recommendation for Conversion

Employee Review data is comprised of several components that are all connected; Review Ratings, Frequency, Rating Model, and Rating Scale. Configuration does not differentiate by Business Unit, so in order to implement standardized Review Ratings for CHRS, every campus will need to have the same values for all of these components.

Review Ratings

Guidelines for usage are as follows:

• Review data (rating and frequency) will be available for use in CHRS. These values should be used once the campus goes live on CHRS.
• Current values in PeopleSoft 9.0 will not be mapped or carried forward to CHRS.
• These guidelines are for system purposes only; there is no change to the existing review forms, however campuses will need to equate the ratings from their forms to the ratings entered in CHRS. A table of existing values by CBA is included at the end of this document.

Review ratings in CHRS are as follows:

1 - Unacceptable/Unsatisfactory 

2 - Below Expectation/Needs Improvement

3 - Satisfactory/Meets Expectations

4 - Exceeds Expectations

5 - Outstanding/Exceptional

Campuses will need to design their process to map existing values on their form to these ratings, and the ratings must go from low to high.

A rating of ‘3’ must always mean Satisfactory/Meets Expectations. Other numeric values may have campus-specific meanings that differ from the descriptions above.

Review Frequencies

The following values will be available in CHRS and are defined as follows: 

• 3 Month

• 6 Month
• 9 month
• 11 Month
• 12 Month (from employment date)
• 18 month
• Annual (fixed date)
• 24 month

If the above frequencies do not match campus process, the closest one should be used.

Rating Model and Rating Scale

These are components that are connected to the Employee Ratings in PeopleSoft. Because of this they are included in the scope of this document. Configuration of Ratings data does not differentiate by Business Unit, so in CHRS every campus will need to have the same values. This will enable usage of the standardized Review Rating and will not require any additional setup work on the part of the campuses.

Rating Model

Review ratings are contained in the model. Since there will be a single set of ratings we would create one Model with the 5 ratings detailed above (1 – 5, lowest to highest).

Rating Scale

In PeopleSoft 9.0 those campuses who have been using it have created their own; in CHRS, a single, simplified Rating Scale will be created with the sole purpose of supporting usage of Review Rating.

For reference, Review Details screen shots from CHRS can be found in the Appendix.

Cross-Functional Impacts (Positive / Negative)

• Benefits Administration: N/A
• Labor Cost Distribution: N/A
• Workforce Administration: Campuses will need to ensure values on review forms are mapped to the values in CHRS to ensure consistent recordkeeping. Data in PeopleSoft 9.0 will not be carried forward or mapped but will be available in the campus legacy copy for reference. 
• Time & Labor: N/A
• Absence Management: N/A
• Temp Faculty: N/A

Final Note

This information has been previously shared with and approved by AVPs at each campus.

If there is a business need related that has not been addressed in this document, please reach out to the CHRS Standardization team:

• Beverly Mausbach    [email protected] 
• Meryl Montalto    [email protected] 
• Jannette Corpus    [email protected] 
• Hayley Young    [email protected] 

REVISION CONTROL

Revision History

Appendix A: Performance Evaluation Requirements by Contract

Updated 6/2021

*Driven by campus practice, not required by guidelines.

Appendix B: Screen Shots – Rating Model and Review Details in CHRS

Rating Model and Ratings:

Rating Scale (connected to the Rating Model):

Employee Review Details:

End of Article