Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Major issues or errors (e.g., dispensing errors, safety risks) are frequent. Significantly hinders workflow or patient care.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction. Makes common errors. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine tasks reliably with standard supervision. Contributes acceptably to pharmacy workflow and patient care safety protocols.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Strong contribution to team/department goals.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative, and contributes substantially to the pharmacy's efficiency, safety, and patient care mission.

Each question, rephrased for a Pharmacy setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's competencies in core pharmacy functions relevant to their specific role (e.g., dispensing, sterile compounding, clinical review, medication order verification, patient counseling, inventory management, use of pharmacy software)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of common drugs, dosages, or basic pharmacy procedures; requires constant step-by-step guidance for dispensing or other basic tasks; frequently makes critical errors due to lack of fundamental knowledge.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core pharmacy concepts; requires frequent reminders and correction on procedures or drug information; struggles with basic pharmacy software use or calculations; slow to learn new tasks.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine tasks in their role (e.g., can accurately dispense standard prescriptions, perform basic checks, use main features of pharmacy software); performs standard procedures with standard supervision.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and drug information for the role; understands the rationale behind clinical checks, dispensing regulations, or sterile compounding principles; capable of explaining concepts to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's competencies; masters complex tasks (e.g., intricate compounding, complex medication reviews, advanced calculations); deep knowledge of pharmacology and therapeutics; acts as a go-to resource for technical/clinical questions; proactively seeks to learn advanced pharmacy practices.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their pharmacy knowledge and skills in verifying/dispensing medication orders accurately, identifying potential drug interactions or safety issues, performing calculations, preparing medications (including sterile/non-sterile compounding), and ensuring patient safety?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in dispensing, calculations, or order verification resulting in unsafe medications; overlooks critical drug interactions or safety alerts; unable to prepare medications accurately; major safety risk.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application; requires frequent checks for accuracy in dispensing or calculations; struggles with identifying significant interactions or complex safety issues; needs significant help with compounding or medication preparation.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine dispensing and verification accurately most of the time; identifies common drug interactions; performs basic calculations correctly; follows standard compounding procedures with guidance; adheres to basic safety protocols.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in dispensing, verification, and calculations; adept at identifying a range of drug interactions and safety concerns; proficient in preparing various medications (including some sterile/non-sterile); maintains strong safety practices.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for near-perfect accuracy; identifies potential issues before they impact patient safety; highly proficient in complex calculations, compounding, and clinical safety checks; contributes to improving medication safety protocols based on expertise.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes in formulary, regulations (e.g., controlled substances), pharmacy software updates, automation, or implementation of new services or clinical protocols?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures, software, or regulatory changes; refuses to use updated systems or adopt new protocols; hinders implementation of changes.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new processes or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/systems/regulations at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new protocols once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new drugs, guidelines, software features, or automation; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn; actively seeks out training on new technologies or clinical areas; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or protocols.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibilities such as managing inventory sections, training new staff on procedures, handling complex patient cases, or participating in pharmacy projects (e.g., formulary review, safety audits, developing protocols)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly; completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a drug class inventory, training a new technician/intern); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like protocol development or safety checks.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on leadership or project responsibilities; demonstrates strong initiative in training, mentoring, or leading significant departmental projects (e.g., implementing a new service, optimizing inventory control, developing a major protocol); is a driving force for progress.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy of pharmacy work and meet deadlines, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently follow procedures for dispensing, compounding, clinical review, quality control, and documentation?

  • 1-2: Work quality (e.g., dispensing accuracy, documentation) is highly inconsistent; frequently misses deadlines for dispensing or reviews; cannot be trusted to complete tasks without constant checking and reminders.

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on dispensing, compounding, or documentation accuracy.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine tasks; generally meets deadlines for dispensing/reviews; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard dispensing, basic compounding, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably meets deadlines for most dispensing, verification, and patient care tasks; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from order receipt to documentation, including complex workflows.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional quality and accuracy; always meets or exceeds deadlines; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work (dispensing, compounding, reviews, documentation); acts as a benchmark for dependability and accuracy.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within their assigned scope of practice/authority (e.g., technician vs. pharmacist roles, specific clinical privileges) and consistently report dispensing errors, adverse drug events, controlled substance discrepancies, significant drug interactions, stockouts of critical medications, or any other critical issues to the appropriate supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope of practice; fails to report significant medication errors, discrepancies, or critical issues; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds scope; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor errors missed); may delay reporting significant issues like controlled substance discrepancies.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned scope/authority; reports critical errors, discrepancies, and significant issues as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical results, errors, discrepancies (including minor ones), and significant issues (ADEs, interactions, stockouts); understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their scope and authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (dispensing error, documentation error, controlled substance count discrepancy, critical stockout), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• B4: Is the person committed to the pharmacy's success and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues with workload, assist in departmental initiatives (e.g., accreditation readiness, process improvement, emergency preparedness), or contribute positively to the pharmacy and hospital reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the pharmacy's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the pharmacy; willingly supports colleagues with heavy workload (e.g., during peak times, short staffing); actively participates in departmental initiatives like accreditation tasks, safety huddles, or process improvements; represents the pharmacy positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to the pharmacy and institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and patient safety (e.g., staying late without being asked during emergencies, covering shifts last minute); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the pharmacy's reputation for excellence in patient care and service.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness in reporting for pharmacy shifts, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts, and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed (e.g., during peak volume, staff shortages)?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling changes.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and works extra time when needed due to workflow demands or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical workload peaks, staff shortages, or hospital emergencies.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow pharmacy Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for all tasks, including dispensing, compounding (sterile/non-sterile), inventory management, controlled substance handling, and equipment maintenance? How well do they document their work, verifications, interventions, errors, and inventory changes according to pharmacy and hospital standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs (e.g., skips steps in compounding, fails to follow dispensing checks); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major safety/compliance risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing lot numbers, incomplete intervention notes); needs frequent reminders about procedures.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs correctly for routine tasks (e.g., standard dispensing, basic compounding); documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., prescription logs, basic notes); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs meticulously (e.g., complex compounding procedures, controlled substance handling protocols); documentation is accurate, complete, and clear for all tasks, including non-routine situations (e.g., incident reports, detailed intervention notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for quality, safety, and compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail in patient notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., prescriptions dispensed, orders verified, IVs compounded, deliveries made) compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while maintaining quality and accuracy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time to complete tasks, causing significant delays in patient care or workflow bottlenecks.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently meets expected output volume for the role; completes tasks within standard timeframes without compromising quality significantly.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while maintaining high quality and accuracy; completes tasks ahead of standard timeframes.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without compromising quality, accuracy, or safety; streamlines own work process and helps others; is a high-productivity individual who enhances overall departmental throughput.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of pharmacy work (e.g., verifying patient/drug information, calculating doses, selecting correct product, labeling, IV admixture, data entry), which directly impacts the quality and reliability of medications and contributes to error-free dispensing?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., wrong drug, wrong dose, wrong patient, mislabeling); lacks attention to detail, leading to significant dispensing errors and major patient safety risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors; attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction due to accuracy issues; may miss important checks.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in dispensing and verification; work is generally accurate for standard procedures; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex tasks (e.g., pediatric doses, compounding); high accuracy in dispensing, verification, calculations, and preparation; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of pharmacy work; meticulously verifies every step and identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., prescribing errors, data entry mistakes); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and patient safety in the dispensing process.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional demeanor and positively represent the pharmacy and the hospital when interacting with patients/families, prescribers, nurses, other healthcare professionals, and pharmacy team members?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior; creates a negative impression of the pharmacy/hospital through interactions; shows disrespect to colleagues or other healthcare staff.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards questions from nurses or patients); occasionally represents the pharmacy poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with colleagues and other healthcare staff; provides standard customer service to patients/families; represents the pharmacy appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/families, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common questions or concerns; represents the pharmacy and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professionalism; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and empathetic attitude in all interactions; skilled communicator who enhances relationships with patients, families, and all healthcare team members; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the pharmacy and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the pharmacy (e.g., assisting with workload, sharing knowledge, helping with breaks)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., physicians, nurses) to resolve medication issues, clarify orders, or improve communication/workflows?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the team; refuses to assist colleagues with workload or provide support; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments, causing friction and delays.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when medication or order issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine inquiries or issue resolution regarding medications or orders.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports pharmacy team members (e.g., jumps in to help with dispensing queue, covers tasks during breaks); engages constructively with staff from other departments to efficiently resolve medication order issues, clarify prescriptions, or troubleshoot delivery problems.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration within the pharmacy; proactively assists colleagues, shares expertise, and helps maintain a positive team environment; builds strong working relationships with other departments, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving regarding patient care and medication management.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving conflicts or communication challenges that may arise within the pharmacy team or between the pharmacy and other hospital departments regarding medication orders, availability, patient issues, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it; contributes negatively to tense situations (e.g., arguments with nurses about orders, blaming colleagues); unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to medication issues or communication breakdowns.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in conflict resolution efforts regarding medication issues or inter-departmental communication.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., mediates a discussion between a technician and nurse, addresses a misunderstanding with a prescriber calmly); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground.

  • 9-10: Is skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to patient care or medication errors; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers between the pharmacy and other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex inter-departmental issues, improving overall working relationships and patient care coordination.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members (technicians, interns, students) on pharmacy procedures, systems, regulations, compounding, or clinical best practices?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; expresses frustration when asked for help.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively on procedures, systems, and basic drug information.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or programs; is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for professional development within the pharmacy team.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., learning new drugs, clinical guidelines, pharmacy software updates, compounding techniques, attending CE, pursuing certifications) to expand their knowledge and skills within the pharmacy and potentially beyond?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding pharmacy knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development in pharmacy.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory CE or training; does not seek out new knowledge independently.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn new skills or procedures when required; attends assigned training and completes necessary CE requirements; learns new tasks as needed for their role.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their pharmacy knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, workshops, self-study) to stay current with guidelines, new drugs, or techniques; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development; actively pursues certifications, advanced training, or specialization; consistently stays ahead of new drug information, guidelines, and best practices; masters new complex areas quickly; shares learnings with the team and contributes to the pharmacy's overall knowledge base and clinical expertise.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve pharmacy processes, efficiency, medication safety, or service delivery? Do they demonstrate initiative in troubleshooting technical problems with pharmacy systems, automation, or resolving complex medication order issues before seeking assistance?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems or leaves them for others; does not attempt troubleshooting with systems or orders.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps for system errors or order issues before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for pharmacy systems or order entry issues; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improvement in pharmacy workflows, safety measures, or efficiency; demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most technical issues (e.g., printer problems, minor software glitches, complex order entry) independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving pharmacy efficiency, quality, safety, or service; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving system changes or workflow redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual problems with systems or medication orders, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the pharmacy.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving pharmacy services, workflows, medication safety protocols, inventory management, technology use, or patient care? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, safety, automation, or clinical service expansion within the pharmacy?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in the pharmacy.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving pharmacy operations or safety; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving pharmacy services, safety protocols, or workflows; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a safety committee, helping pilot a new system).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving pharmacy operations, patient safety, or clinical services; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement automation, developing a new clinical protocol, improving the dispensing process); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the pharmacy's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable clinical standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequently misses critical drug-related problems or provides incorrect/unsafe recommendations. Significantly hinders optimal patient care.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below clinical expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on clinical reasoning or recommendations. Misses common drug-related issues. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability in clinical tasks is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of a clinical pharmacist role. Can perform routine clinical reviews and address standard drug information questions reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common drug-related problems and makes appropriate basic recommendations. Contributes acceptably to patient care safety.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific clinical areas. Highly reliable for most clinical tasks and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and resolving complex drug-related problems. Provides valuable recommendations and insights to medical teams.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses clinical expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for other pharmacists and clinicians. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing therapy and patient outcomes. Contributes substantially to improving clinical practice and medication safety hospital-wide.

Rephrased for Clinical Pharmacy Services:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's clinical knowledge and competencies relevant to supporting general duty clinicians (e.g., common disease states, frequently used medications, clinical guidelines, drug interactions, adverse drug events, pharmacokinetics, critical appraisal of medical literature)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of common medications or disease states; unable to apply basic clinical guidelines; frequently provides incorrect or outdated drug information; lacks fundamental understanding of clinical pharmacy principles.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping clinical concepts; requires frequent reminders and correction on drug information or guidelines; struggles with basic clinical application; knowledge is often superficial.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate clinical knowledge for common scenarios encountered by general duty clinicians; can apply standard clinical guidelines; provides accurate drug information for routine questions; understands basic pharmacokinetics.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong clinical knowledge covering a broad range of common and some complex issues; proficient in applying evidence-based guidelines; adept at interpreting literature; provides valuable drug information and clinical insights; strong understanding of pharmacokinetics and therapeutics.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in clinical knowledge for general medicine and potentially some specialties; deep and current understanding of pharmacology, therapeutics, and clinical guidelines; master of critical appraisal; acts as a go-to resource for complex clinical drug information; proactively seeks to expand knowledge in advanced areas.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their clinical knowledge and skills in reviewing patient profiles, identifying drug-related problems (DRPs), making evidence-based recommendations for therapy optimization, interpreting lab data, performing calculations, and contributing to patient care decisions?

  • 1-2: Frequently misses critical DRPs (e.g., major interactions, incorrect dosing for renal impairment); unable to interpret lab data relevant to medications; provides inappropriate or unsafe recommendations; does not effectively contribute to patient care discussions.

  • 3-4: Misses common DRPs or identifies them inconsistently; struggles with interpreting relevant lab data; recommendations are often generic or lack sufficient evidence basis; requires significant guidance in applying knowledge to patient cases.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge to identify common DRPs in routine patient reviews; provides appropriate basic recommendations based on standard guidelines; interprets essential lab data (e.g., renal function, basic electrolytes) relevant to medications; performs routine clinical calculations correctly; contributes adequately to basic patient care decisions.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge to identify a wide range of DRPs (including some complex ones); provides clear, evidence-based, and practical recommendations; skilled at interpreting complex lab data and incorporating into recommendations; effectively contributes to patient care rounds and discussions, influencing therapy decisions positively.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in identifying subtle or complex DRPs; recommendations are consistently highly impactful, evidence-based, and tailored to individual patient needs; master of interpreting all relevant lab/clinical data; proactively optimizes therapy and anticipates potential issues; is a critical contributor to complex patient care decisions and is highly valued by medical teams for their clinical acumen.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes in hospital formulary, evolving clinical practice guidelines, implementation of new clinical protocols, changes in EMR functionalities related to clinical review, or new patient care models?

  • 1-2: Actively resists adopting new guidelines or using updated systems; refuses to adapt to formulary changes; hinders implementation of new clinical protocols or workflows.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to incorporate new guidelines or protocols into practice; struggles with using updated clinical systems; requires excessive support during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new guidelines, protocols, or system functionalities at a reasonable pace; incorporates new practices into routine workflow after standard training.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes (formulary, guidelines, protocols); shows eagerness to learn and implement new clinical practices or EMR features; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve practice; actively seeks out information on new guidelines and protocols; helps other clinical pharmacists and clinicians understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early adopter and advocate for new clinical initiatives.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibilities such as covering specific clinical services/units, managing assigned consults, following up on complex patient cases, contributing to clinical committees or projects (e.g., antibiotic stewardship, protocol development, grand rounds presentations), or mentoring students/residents?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any clinical responsibility beyond basic assigned patient reviews; refuses to accept consults; shows no interest in contributing to clinical projects or education.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on clinical responsibilities only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted to accept consults or follow up; shows minimal engagement in clinical projects or teaching.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned clinical responsibilities willingly (e.g., patient list coverage, consults); follows up on recommendations reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with clinical committees or mentoring.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional clinical responsibilities (e.g., covering a busy service, mentoring a student/resident effectively); volunteers for or actively participates in clinical committees or special projects.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant clinical responsibilities or leadership roles; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex patient cases, leading clinical projects (e.g., developing a new stewardship initiative), or providing impactful education; is a driving force for clinical excellence.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy in clinical reviews, interventions, and documentation, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently manage their assigned patient load, follow up on recommendations, and document accurately?

  • 1-2: Clinical reviews are highly inconsistent in depth or accuracy; frequently misses follow-up actions; documentation is often missing or provides unsafe recommendations; cannot be trusted to manage patient assignments independently.

  • 3-4: Clinical review is inconsistent; occasionally misses follow-up or requires reminders; documentation is often incomplete or unclear; needs frequent checks on clinical reasoning and recommendations.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine clinical reviews; generally follows up on recommendations; can be trusted to manage a standard patient assignment and document interventions adequately with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Clinical reviews, interventions, and documentation are consistently high quality and accurate; reliably follows up on all recommendations and assigned tasks; can be trusted to handle most clinical responsibilities independently, including complex patient loads.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers clinical work of exceptional quality and accuracy (reviews, interventions, documentation); always completes follow-up actions promptly; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their clinical role; documentation is exemplary; acts as a benchmark for clinical dependability and accuracy.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to practice within their assigned scope of clinical practice/privileges and consistently report critical clinical findings (e.g., severe ADEs, critical drug interactions, identified prescribing errors), near misses in clinical review, or any other significant patient safety concerns to the appropriate medical team or supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope of practice or clinical privileges; fails to report severe ADEs, prescribing errors, or critical interactions; actively hides errors or near misses discovered during review.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds scope or makes recommendations outside expertise without consultation; reports some but not all required critical findings; may delay reporting significant safety issues.

  • 5-6: Generally practices within assigned clinical scope/privileges; reports critical clinical findings and safety issues as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently practices strictly within scope of clinical practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical clinical findings (ADEs, interactions, identified errors), near misses, and significant patient safety concerns to the relevant healthcare team and supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their clinical scope and limitations, consulting others appropriately; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential patient safety issue identified during review (e.g., potential drug interactions, subtle dosing errors, lab monitoring needs); acts as a key clinical safety check and contributes to improving reporting systems for clinical issues.

• B4: Is the person committed to improving patient outcomes through clinical pharmacy services and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support medical teams proactively, participate in clinical quality improvement initiatives, or contribute positively to the clinical pharmacy program and hospital's reputation for patient care?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to improving patient care through clinical pharmacy; only does the absolute minimum required reviews; refuses to assist medical teams proactively or participate in initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned clinical reviews but shows little interest in proactively supporting medical teams or contributing to clinical program goals; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned clinical duties; is a reliable team member in supporting medical teams when asked; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in clinical initiatives when assigned.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to optimizing patient care; proactively supports medical teams with drug information and recommendations (e.g., joins rounds even if not assigned, offers insights spontaneously); actively participates in clinical quality improvement initiatives (e.g., contributes data, helps develop protocols); represents clinical pharmacy positively to other departments.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing patient outcomes through advanced clinical pharmacy practice; consistently goes above and beyond standard reviews to proactively support medical teams and identify optimization opportunities; actively champions and drives clinical quality improvement initiatives; is a positive force for advancing the clinical pharmacy program's impact and significantly contributes to the hospital's reputation for high-quality patient care.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness in being available for clinical rounds/meetings, consistency in covering assigned clinical services/units, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent clinical needs (e.g., codes, STAT consults), and willingness to put in extra time when needed for patient care continuity or workload peaks?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness for rounds/meetings; highly unreliable for covering assigned clinical services; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality for clinical activities; sometimes difficult regarding covering assigned services or responding to urgent needs; reluctant to stay extra time for patient care continuity.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements for clinical activities; is reasonably reliable for covering assigned services; demonstrates some flexibility for urgent clinical needs.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality for all clinical activities (rounds, meetings, consults); highly reliable for covering assigned services and adjusting to urgent needs; willingly flexible with scheduling and works extra time when needed for patient care demands or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for covering clinical services and immediately available for urgent clinical needs (codes, trauma, STAT consults); highly proactive in ensuring clinical coverage and continuity, often anticipating needs for extra time during critical periods.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow clinical practice guidelines and pharmacy clinical protocols? How well do they document their clinical reviews, interventions, recommendations, and consultations in the electronic medical record (EMR) or pharmacy system according to established standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from clinical guidelines/protocols; documentation in EMR is often missing, inaccurate, or unclear; recommendations are poorly justified or not documented at all; creates major safety/compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from guidelines/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing rationale, vague recommendations); needs frequent reminders about documentation standards.

  • 5-6: Generally follows clinical guidelines/protocols correctly for common conditions; documentation in EMR/pharmacy system is adequate for routine reviews and interventions; complies with most documentation requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant clinical guidelines and pharmacy protocols meticulously; documentation in EMR/pharmacy system is accurate, complete, and clear for all reviews and interventions, including complex cases; understands the importance of thorough documentation for communication and legal compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all guidelines/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail and rationale in EMR notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing guidelines/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity or impact.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of clinical work completion (e.g., patients reviewed, consults completed, interventions documented) compared to other clinical pharmacists with similar roles and experience, while maintaining quality and accuracy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers in reviewing patients or completing consults; output volume is very low; requires excessive time to complete clinical tasks, causing delays in patient care or burdening colleagues.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers in clinical workflow; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete patient reviews or consults, occasionally impacting clinical service delivery.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently manages an expected volume of patient reviews and consults for their assigned service; completes clinical tasks within standard timeframes without compromising quality significantly.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume (patients reviewed, consults completed, interventions) is above average compared to peers, while maintaining high quality and accuracy of clinical recommendations and documentation; manages workload effectively.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient in managing a high volume of complex clinical work; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own clinical workflow; is a high-productivity clinical pharmacist who enhances overall clinical service capacity.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of clinical pharmacy work (e.g., reviewing patient history, lab values, medication lists, identifying potential errors, calculating complex doses), which directly impacts the quality and safety of medication therapy decisions?

  • 1-2: Frequently misses critical details in patient profiles (e.g., allergies, renal function, wrong weight); lacks attention to detail, leading to missed DRPs, inappropriate recommendations, and significant patient safety risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during clinical review; attention to detail is inconsistent; clinical work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine clinical reviews; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard patient profiles; clinical work is generally accurate for common cases; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex patient profiles and cases; high accuracy in identifying DRPs, performing calculations, and formulating recommendations; effectively validates own clinical findings.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free clinical work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of patient review and recommendation formulation; meticulously verifies every detail and identifies potential errors made by others (prescribers, data entry, lab results) before they impact patient care; is a champion for clinical accuracy and patient safety.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional demeanor and positively represent the clinical pharmacy program and the hospital when interacting with medical teams, nurses, residents, students, other healthcare professionals, and patients/families?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards medical teams or other staff; creates a negative impression of clinical pharmacy through interactions (e.g., confrontational during rounds); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions with medical teams/staff can be difficult or unhelpful; occasionally represents clinical pharmacy poorly (e.g., dismissive of questions).

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with medical teams and other healthcare staff; represents clinical pharmacy appropriately in routine interactions (rounds, consults).

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, and helpful; has positive and constructive interactions with medical teams, nurses, and other staff during rounds, consults, and meetings; effectively addresses common questions or concerns.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and collaborative behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and knowledgeable attitude in all clinical interactions; is highly respected and sought out by medical teams for their expertise and approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the clinical pharmacy program and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with other clinical pharmacists and pharmacy staff? Do they actively and constructively interact with medical teams (physicians, residents, students), nursing staff, and other healthcare professionals during rounds, consults, and in addressing patient care issues?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the pharmacy team or clinical group; refuses to assist colleagues; avoids or actively hinders interactions with medical teams or other staff, causing friction and delays in patient care.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate with pharmacy colleagues on complex cases; provides minimal assistance; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with medical teams or nurses when patient care issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with clinical pharmacy team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with medical teams and other staff for routine consults or issue resolution regarding medications or patient care.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports clinical pharmacy team members (e.g., discusses complex cases, helps with workload coverage); engages constructively and effectively with medical teams, nurses, and other staff during rounds, consults, and multidisciplinary meetings to optimize patient care.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within clinical pharmacy and across disciplines; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with medical teams, nursing, and other staff; is an integral part of the interdisciplinary care team, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that directly impacts patient outcomes.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the clinical pharmacy team or between clinical pharmacy and medical teams/other services regarding medication therapy decisions, patient care plans, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids clinical disagreements or actively escalates them (e.g., confrontational with prescribers); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle differences in clinical opinion professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle clinical disagreements or communication breakdowns; may withdraw or become defensive when challenged on recommendations; can sometimes worsen conflict situations with medical teams.

  • 5-6: Handles basic clinical disagreements appropriately and professionally; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient care.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve clinical disagreements and communication challenges constructively (e.g., discusses rationale respectfully with a prescriber, clarifies misunderstandings with a nurse calmly); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating complex clinical discussions and disagreements; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers between clinical pharmacy and medical teams/other services; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve interdisciplinary clinical issues effectively, improving overall patient care and team dynamics.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their clinical knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced clinical pharmacists, residents, students, and providing education to medical/nursing staff on drug information, guidelines, or clinical topics?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others clinically; withholds clinical knowledge or makes it difficult for students/residents to learn; refuses to provide education to medical/nursing staff.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal clinical assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining clinical concepts or procedures; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others clinically when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic clinical instruction and information to students/residents/staff.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in clinical training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues, residents, and students; shares clinical knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful drug information education to medical/nursing staff upon request or proactively on common topics.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in clinical training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor students/residents and less experienced pharmacists; consistently provides impactful, high-quality drug information education to medical/nursing staff (e.g., presenting at grand rounds, developing educational materials); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for clinical skill development across disciplines.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., staying current with clinical literature/guidelines, learning about new disease states/specialties, attending clinical conferences/webinars, pursuing advanced certifications/degrees) to expand their clinical knowledge and skills?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in staying current with clinical literature or guidelines; avoids clinical training or educational opportunities; resistant to expanding clinical knowledge.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory clinical CE; does not seek out new clinical knowledge independently or keep fully current with guidelines.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new drugs or guidelines when required for their service; attends assigned clinical training and completes necessary CE; learns new clinical tasks as needed for their role.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their clinical knowledge; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, literature review, discussions with specialists) to stay current with guidelines, new drugs, and practice updates; learns new clinical areas or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous clinical learning; actively pursues board certification or other advanced training; consistently stays ahead of new clinical literature, guidelines, and best practices; master of evidence-based practice; shares clinical learnings with the team and medical staff; significantly contributes to the clinical program's expertise.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve clinical pharmacy processes, medication safety, drug utilization, or patient outcomes? Do they demonstrate initiative in researching and resolving complex clinical drug information questions or patient care issues independently?

  • 1-2: Shows no clinical initiative; waits to be told what to review or when to intervene; ignores potential areas for clinical improvement; does not attempt to resolve clinical questions or patient issues independently.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows clinical initiative; identifies patient care problems but doesn't attempt solutions or research; performs minimal steps in resolving clinical questions before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common clinical problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard research for drug information questions; participates in minor clinical process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving clinical workflows, medication safety measures (e.g., suggesting order set changes), or drug utilization; demonstrates initiative in thoroughly researching and resolving most complex clinical or drug information questions independently; suggests practical clinical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving clinical services, patient outcomes, or medication safety hospital-wide; takes initiative to implement clinical improvements (with approval), potentially involving protocol development or system changes; is highly skilled and proactive in researching and resolving complex or unusual clinical problems, often leading to significant positive impact on patient care; acts as a key clinical problem-solver and change agent.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving clinical pharmacy services, medication safety protocols, therapeutic guideline development, drug utilization, or patient care through clinical initiatives? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to clinical quality, safety, or service expansion?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improving clinical services or patient care; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in clinical pharmacy.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers clinical suggestions, and ideas may be impractical or lack evidence; shows no interest in clinical initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving clinical operations or patient safety; participates adequately in clinical team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving clinical services, safety protocols, or contributing to guideline development; actively contributes to departmental clinical initiatives (e.g., participation in a stewardship project, helping develop an educational program).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving clinical pharmacy services, patient outcomes, or medication safety; actively champions and drives implementation of new clinical initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement a new monitoring service, developing a hospital-wide clinical protocol, improving drug utilization processes); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the clinical pharmacy program's continuous improvement and innovation efforts, directly impacting patient care.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Major issues or errors are frequent. Significantly hinders team/department function.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction. Makes common errors. Progress is slow even with support.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine tasks reliably with standard supervision. Contributes acceptably to team/department goals.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative, and contributes substantially to the department's success.

A: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's competencies in core laboratory functions relevant to their specific role (e.g., sample handling, test methodologies, instrument operation, quality control procedures, result validation)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited understanding of core lab procedures; requires constant step-by-step guidance for basic tasks; frequently makes critical errors due to lack of fundamental knowledge.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core procedures; requires frequent reminders and correction; struggles with basic instrument operation or QC principles; slow to learn new methods.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine tasks; can perform standard procedures and operate common instruments with standard supervision; follows QC procedures correctly most of the time.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and instruments for the role; understands the 'why' behind procedures (e.g., QC rules, validation steps); capable of teaching basic concepts to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's competencies; masters complex procedures and instrumentation; understands underlying scientific principles deeply; acts as a go-to resource for technical questions and complex issues; proactively seeks to learn advanced techniques.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their laboratory knowledge and skills in performing tests accurately, interpreting results, troubleshooting instrument or assay issues, and ensuring patient safety?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in test performance or data entry resulting in inaccurate results; overlooks critical safety steps; unable to perform any troubleshooting independently.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application; requires frequent checks for accuracy; struggles with interpreting results beyond basic ranges; needs significant help with troubleshooting.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine tests accurately most of the time; interprets standard results correctly; follows basic safety protocols; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for accurate results and safe practices; adept at interpreting a range of results, including some outliers; capable of troubleshooting moderately complex instrument or assay issues independently.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for high accuracy; identifies potential issues before they impact results or safety; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual problems; contributes to improving testing accuracy or safety protocols based on expertise.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes in laboratory procedures (SOPs), new instrumentation, software updates (e.g., LIS), automation, or implementation of new test methods?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures or technologies; refuses to use updated equipment or software; hinders implementation of changes.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/technologies at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new SOPs once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new methods, instruments, or software; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn; actively seeks out training on new technologies; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert on new systems/procedures.

B: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibilities such as managing specific tasks, training new staff on procedures, handling complex cases, or participating in laboratory projects (e.g., validation, audits)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others; shows no interest in contributing to projects.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly; completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities; volunteers for tasks like training or assisting with validation steps; actively participates in departmental initiatives.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on leadership or project responsibilities; demonstrates strong initiative in training or mentoring; champions departmental projects and complex tasks; is a driving force for progress.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy of laboratory work and meet deadlines, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently follow procedures for sample processing, testing, quality control, and documentation?

  • 1-2: Work quality is highly inconsistent; frequently misses deadlines; cannot be trusted to complete tasks without constant checking and reminders.

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on sample processing, testing, or documentation accuracy.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine tasks; generally meets deadlines; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard sample handling, testing, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably meets deadlines; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from sample receipt to documentation, including complex workflows.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional quality and accuracy; always meets or exceeds deadlines; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability and accuracy.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within their assigned authority (e.g., test performance, data entry, basic troubleshooting) and consistently report critical results, instrument malfunctions, QC deviations, sample integrity issues, or any other significant incidents or deviations to the appropriate supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their authority; fails to report critical results or significant issues; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents; may delay reporting significant issues.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports critical results and major issues as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates within authority boundaries; reliably and promptly reports all required critical results, incidents, and deviations; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (QC, instrument, sample, safety, etc.), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain.

• B4: Is the person committed to the laboratory's success and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues with workload, assist in departmental initiatives (e.g., accreditation readiness, process improvement), or contribute positively to the laboratory and hospital reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the lab's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the lab; willingly supports colleagues with workload; actively participates in departmental initiatives like accreditation tasks or process improvements; represents the lab positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to the laboratory and institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success; actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the lab's reputation for excellence.

C: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness in reporting for laboratory shifts, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts, and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes; reluctant to stay extra time.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and works extra time when needed.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical staffing needs or emergencies.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow laboratory Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for all tasks, including sample handling, testing, quality control, and maintenance? How well do they document their work, results, and any incidents according to laboratory and hospital standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs; documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear; needs frequent reminders about procedures.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard procedures; complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, and clear for all tasks, including non-routine situations; understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for quality and compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs; documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs or documentation processes and suggests improvements.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of sample processing, test performance, and result entry, compared to peers with similar roles and experience, while maintaining quality?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time to complete tasks, hindering workflow.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently meets expected output volume for the role; completes tasks within standard timeframes.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while maintaining quality and accuracy; completes tasks ahead of standard timeframes.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without compromising quality or accuracy; streamlines own work process; is a high-productivity individual.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of laboratory work (e.g., sample identification, aliquotting, test performance, data entry), which directly impacts the quality and reliability of results and contributes to error-free output?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., mislabeling, wrong test, incorrect data entry); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable results and patient risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors; attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail; work is generally accurate for standard procedures.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex tasks; high accuracy in sample handling, testing, and data; validates own work effectively.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects; meticulously verifies work and identifies potential errors (even minor ones) before they impact results; is a champion for accuracy and quality.

D: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional demeanor and positively represent the laboratory and the hospital when interacting with colleagues, patients (if applicable), or staff from other departments (e.g., nursing, physicians)?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional or disruptive behavior; creates a negative impression of the lab/hospital through interactions; shows disrespect to colleagues or staff from other departments.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful; occasionally represents the lab poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with colleagues and staff from other departments; represents the lab appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional and courteous; has positive interactions with colleagues and staff from other departments; represents the lab and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professionalism; consistently maintains a positive and helpful attitude in all interactions; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the laboratory and the hospital through exemplary conduct.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the laboratory (e.g., assisting with workload, sharing knowledge)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., nursing, clinical staff) to resolve sample issues, clarify orders, or improve workflows?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the team; refuses to assist colleagues; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments, causing friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine inquiries or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports team members (e.g., helps with heavy workload, shares tips); engages constructively with staff from other departments to efficiently resolve sample problems or clarify information.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration within the lab; proactively assists colleagues and shares expertise; builds strong working relationships with other departments, facilitating smooth operations and joint problem-solving.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving conflicts or communication challenges that may arise within the laboratory team or between the laboratory and other hospital departments regarding samples, results, or procedures?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it; contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in conflict resolution efforts.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively; communicates effectively to de-escalate situations; participates positively in finding solutions to inter-departmental communication issues.

  • 9-10: Is skilled in navigating difficult conversations; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve issues effectively within the lab or with other departments, improving overall working relationships.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members on laboratory procedures, instrumentation, quality control, or best practices?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience in explaining procedures.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or programs; is a valuable resource for skill development within the team.

E: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., mastering new tests, operating new instruments, understanding different laboratory sections, attending workshops, pursuing certifications) to expand their knowledge and skills within the laboratory?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new knowledge independently.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn new skills or procedures when required; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities within or outside the lab; learns new tasks or instruments readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about learning; actively pursues continuous professional development (certifications, advanced training); masters new complex areas quickly; shares learnings with the team; contributes to the lab's overall knowledge base.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve laboratory processes, efficiency, quality, or safety? Do they demonstrate initiative in troubleshooting technical problems with instruments, samples, or results before seeking assistance?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems or leaves them for others; does not attempt troubleshooting.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improvement in processes or workflows; demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most technical issues independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving lab efficiency, quality, or safety; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval); is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual problems, often resolving them independently; acts as a problem-solver and change agent.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving laboratory services, workflows, patient sample management, safety, or quality control? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, safety, automation, or process improvement within the lab?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions; resistant to new ideas or initiatives.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improvement; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., QC projects, safety audits).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving lab operations or patient care; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives; is recognized as a valuable contributor to the lab's continuous improvement efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., radiation safety errors, critical image quality issues, patient misidentification). Significantly hinders workflow or patient safety.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures or techniques. Makes common errors (e.g., frequent retakes, minor safety lapses). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine imaging procedures reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common technical issues and follows basic safety protocols. Contributes acceptably to workflow and image quality standards.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex procedures, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing technical issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on image quality or workflow.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing imaging, ensuring safety, and improving department operations. Consistently produces high-quality images even in challenging situations.

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's competencies in core radiology functions relevant to their specific role/modality (e.g., patient positioning, operating imaging equipment, understanding protocols, basic anatomy/pathology, radiation safety, MRI safety, sterile technique, use of PACS/RIS)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of equipment operation or basic positioning; requires constant step-by-step guidance for basic procedures; frequently makes critical errors due to lack of fundamental knowledge (e.g., major safety violations).

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core procedures or safety principles; requires frequent reminders and correction on positioning or technical factors; struggles with basic equipment use or PACS/RIS; slow to learn new protocols.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine procedures in their role/modality; can perform standard exams and operate common equipment with standard supervision; follows basic safety protocols correctly most of the time.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and equipment for the role; understands the 'why' behind protocols (e.g., specific views, technical factor adjustments, safety checks); capable of teaching basic concepts to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their modality's competencies; masters complex or challenging procedures; deep knowledge of equipment physics, safety regulations, and related anatomy/pathology; acts as a go-to resource for technical questions and complex cases; proactively seeks to learn advanced techniques or cross-train.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their radiology knowledge and skills in performing imaging studies accurately, optimizing image quality, adapting techniques for difficult patients/situations, troubleshooting equipment issues, and ensuring patient safety (radiation dose, MRI screening, contrast reactions)?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in performing studies or positioning resulting in non-diagnostic images; overlooks critical safety steps (e.g., ignoring patient history, radiation badge issues, incorrect MRI screening); unable to perform basic troubleshooting; major safety risk.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application, resulting in frequent retakes or suboptimal images; requires frequent checks for accuracy in positioning or technique; struggles with adapting for difficult patients; needs significant help with troubleshooting equipment or artifacts.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine studies accurately most of the time; achieves adequate image quality for standard exams; follows basic safety protocols consistently; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and optimal image quality; adept at adapting techniques for challenging patients or unusual presentations; proficient in troubleshooting moderately complex equipment or artifact issues independently; maintains strong safety practices.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for high accuracy and consistently superior image quality; identifies potential issues before they impact image quality or safety; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual problems (equipment, patient, artifact); contributes to improving imaging techniques or safety protocols based on expertise.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new imaging protocols, software updates (PACS/RIS), new equipment, automation, evolving safety guidelines (radiation, MRI), or implementation of new procedures?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures, equipment, or software; refuses to use updated systems or adopt new protocols; hinders implementation of changes in the department.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new equipment or protocols.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/technologies/protocols at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new SOPs once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new modalities, protocols, or software features; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn and improve; actively seeks out training on new technologies or advanced procedures; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or clinical protocols.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing specific equipment or supply areas, training new staff on procedures, assisting with complex exams, or participating in departmental projects (e.g., QA initiatives, accreditation tasks)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others with difficult patients or exams; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned (e.g., trains only when forced); needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., covers a specific room, helps with supplies); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., becoming the lead technologist for a specific piece of equipment, training a new hire effectively); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like QA or protocol review.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on leadership or project responsibilities; demonstrates strong initiative in training, mentoring, or leading significant departmental projects (e.g., developing a new safety checklist, optimizing workflow for a modality); is a driving force for progress and improvement.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and output (image quality, number of completed studies) even without direct supervision? Can the person be trusted to independently follow procedures for patient identification, safety screening, positioning, technical factors, and documentation?

  • 1-2: Image quality is highly inconsistent; frequently fails to complete assigned study volume; cannot be trusted to perform basic tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (misidentification, safety lapse).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses completing assigned studies or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on patient identification, positioning, or technical factors; documentation is often incomplete.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine studies; generally meets assigned study volume; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard patient identification, safety screening, positioning, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably meets or exceeds assigned study volume; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from patient check-in to documentation, including complex exams; meticulous with safety checks.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional quality (superior images) and accuracy; always meets or exceeds study volume expectations; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability, quality, and safety.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within the limits of authority assigned to him/her (e.g., performing specific procedures, administering contrast if privileged)? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors equipment malfunctions, safety incidents (radiation, MRI, contrast), patient issues during the exam, protocol deviations, or any other significant issues promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope or privileges (e.g., performs exams they are not trained for, administers contrast without authorization); fails to report major equipment issues, safety incidents, or patient emergencies; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor equipment glitches missed); may delay reporting significant issues like patient reactions or protocol deviations.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority and privileges; reports major equipment malfunctions, safety incidents, and patient emergencies as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of practice and privileges; reliably and promptly reports all required equipment issues, safety incidents (including near misses), patient issues during exams, and protocol deviations to the appropriate supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and equipment maintenance.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits and modalities; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (equipment performance changes, subtle safety concerns, patient discomfort during exam), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• B4: Is the person committed to perform his best for the institution and go beyond the call of duty when required to support and build his department and the institution as a whole (e.g., staying late for trauma cases, covering shifts in emergencies, participating in hospital-wide safety initiatives)?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the department's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues with difficult patients or stay late for urgent cases.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others with workflow or difficult patients; avoids participation in departmental initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the department; willingly supports colleagues with workload (e.g., helps transfer patients, assists with positioning); actively participates in departmental initiatives like safety audits or accreditation tasks; represents the department positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to the department and institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and patient care (e.g., staying late without being asked for emergency cases, covering shifts last minute); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the department's reputation for excellence.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts (including on-call), consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts (e.g., evenings, weekends), and willingness to be available or put in extra time when urgently needed for patient care (e.g., STAT exams, trauma)?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage, including on-call; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to emergency calls.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or on-call duty; reluctant to stay extra time for urgent cases.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts and on-call duty; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs and urgent exams.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts and on-call; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for STAT exams, trauma cases, or workload peaks.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift and on-call coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical patient care needs or emergencies; always available when needed.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and imaging protocols for all tasks, including patient screening, preparation, positioning, technical factor selection, image processing, and equipment maintenance? How well do they document procedure details, patient history, contrast administration, and any incidents in PACS/RIS according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., ignores screening questions, uses incorrect technique, fails to prep patient); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major safety/quality risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing technical factors, incomplete history); needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs/protocols correctly for routine exams; documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., basic procedure notes, contrast info); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs/protocols meticulously; documentation in PACS/RIS is accurate, complete, and clear for all exams, including non-routine situations (e.g., patient challenges, incident notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for quality, safety, and compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on challenging cases, complex histories); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or safety.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., studies performed, patient throughput) compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high image quality and patient safety?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per study, causing significant delays in patient flow and burdening the schedule.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete studies, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of studies for the modality; completes exams within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and safety.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high image quality and patient safety; manages workload effectively and keeps workflow moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity technologist who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of radiology work (e.g., patient identification, screening responses, anatomical positioning, technical factor selection, image labeling, contrast checks), which directly impacts image quality, diagnosis, and patient safety?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., misidentifies patient, performs wrong exam, uses incorrect technique leading to non-diagnostic images, misses critical safety flags); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable exams and major patient risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details (e.g., minor positioning errors, incomplete screening); attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires retakes or correction due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard exams; work is generally accurate for common procedures; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex positioning, technique selection, and screening; high accuracy in patient identification, safety checks, and image labeling; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of radiology work; meticulously verifies every step (patient ID, safety screen, order, positioning, technique); consistently produces perfect or near-perfect images; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., order entry mistakes); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and patient safety in image acquisition.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional demeanor and positively represent the Radiology department and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may be anxious or in pain), colleagues, nurses, physicians (radiologists, referrers), and transport staff?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients or staff; creates a negative impression of the department/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with patients, arguing with colleagues); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., brusque with patients, poor communication with transport); occasionally represents the department poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients and other staff; provides standard patient care and communication; represents the department appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic (especially with patients), and helpful; has positive interactions with patients, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common questions or concerns; represents the department and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and compassionate behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and calming attitude in all interactions, particularly with anxious or difficult patients; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the Radiology department and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within Radiology (e.g., assisting with patient transfers/positioning, sharing workload, helping with breaks)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., ED, nursing, transport) to coordinate patient flow, clarify orders, or resolve patient issues?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the Radiology team; refuses to assist colleagues with patients or workload; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments (transport, nursing), causing significant delays and friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when patient flow or order issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports Radiology team members (e.g., jumps in to help with challenging patient transfers, assists with busy workflow); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (e.g., nursing for patient prep, transport for timeliness) to coordinate patient flow efficiently and clarify imaging needs.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within Radiology and across disciplines; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with other departments; is an integral part of the patient care process, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures timely and safe imaging.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the Radiology team or between Radiology and other hospital departments regarding patient scheduling, exam protocols, patient preparation, or technical issues?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with nursing about patient prep, blaming transport for delays); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to workflow or inter-departmental communication.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient flow or protocols.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly discusses scheduling issues with transport, clarifies protocol needs with nursing); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to patient care coordination or technical challenges; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers between Radiology and other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex inter-departmental issues, improving overall workflow and working relationships.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members, students, or providing education to medical/nursing staff on topics like radiation safety, MRI screening, or procedure preparation?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff/students to learn; refuses to provide basic education to other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures or safety principles; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or safety topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues and students; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful basic education to medical/nursing staff upon request or proactively on relevant topics (e.g., NPO status, metal screening).

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new technologists and students; consistently provides impactful, high-quality education to other departments (e.g., presenting on MRI safety to nurses, developing guides for patient prep); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for technical and safety knowledge across disciplines.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., learning new equipment, mastering advanced protocols, cross-training in other modalities, attending conferences/webinars, pursuing advanced certifications/degrees) to expand their technical and clinical knowledge within Radiology?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge in radiology; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new knowledge independently regarding new techniques or modalities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn new procedures or operate new equipment when required; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their radiology knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, cross-training) to stay current with techniques, new equipment, or protocols; learns new tasks or modalities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in radiology; actively pursues certifications in new modalities or advanced imaging areas; consistently stays ahead of new techniques, equipment, and safety best practices; shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and capabilities.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve radiology processes, workflow efficiency, image quality, or patient safety? Do they demonstrate initiative in troubleshooting technical problems with equipment or complex patient positioning issues before seeking assistance?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with equipment or workflow; does not attempt troubleshooting.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., poor images) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help with equipment errors or difficult patients.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for equipment errors or positioning challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improvement in workflow, image quality, or safety measures (e.g., suggesting a positioning aid, optimizing a technique); demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most technical issues with equipment or resolving complex patient positioning challenges independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, image quality, or patient safety; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving workflow changes or protocol adjustments; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual problems with equipment, techniques, or patients, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving radiology services, workflow, patient safety protocols, imaging techniques, or technology use? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, safety, automation, or procedure optimization within the department?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in radiology.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving radiology operations or safety; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflow, safety protocols (e.g., contrast administration), or imaging techniques; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a safety committee, helping pilot a new software feature).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving radiology operations, patient safety, image quality, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to reduce retakes, developing a new safety checklist, optimizing protocols); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable clinical standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequently misses critical patient needs or provides inappropriate/unsafe treatment/recommendations. Significantly hinders patient progress or safety.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on assessment, treatment planning, or intervention delivery. Misses common therapy-related issues. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability in clinical tasks is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of a therapist role. Can perform routine assessments and treatments reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common patient needs and follows basic safety protocols and treatment plans. Contributes acceptably to patient care and functional goals.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific clinical areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex patient presentations, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing complex patient issues or seeking improvements. Provides valuable recommendations and insights to patients and medical teams.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses clinical expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for other therapists and healthcare professionals. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing patient function and outcomes. Contributes substantially to improving therapy practice and patient rehabilitation across the service or institution.

Rephrased for a PMR/Therapy setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's clinical knowledge and competencies relevant to patient assessment, treatment planning, intervention delivery, and therapeutic equipment use within their specific therapy discipline (PT, OT, ST) and common conditions encountered (e.g., post-surgical, neurological, medical comorbidities)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic assessment techniques or common interventions; requires constant step-by-step guidance for fundamental patient care tasks; frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational clinical knowledge.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core clinical concepts for assessment or treatment; requires frequent reminders and correction on techniques or rationale; struggles with basic therapeutic equipment use; slow to learn new approaches.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine patient assessment and treatment in their discipline; can perform standard interventions and use common equipment with standard supervision; understands basic precautions and contraindications.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong clinical knowledge covering a broad range of common and some complex conditions; proficient in advanced assessment and treatment techniques for their discipline; understands the evidence basis behind interventions; capable of teaching basic concepts to others (patients, staff).

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their discipline's clinical knowledge; masters complex patient assessments and treatment strategies; deep understanding of related anatomy, physiology, and pathology impacting function; acts as a go-to resource for complex clinical questions and challenging patient cases; proactively seeks to learn advanced techniques and specializations.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their clinical knowledge and skills in assessing patient function/needs, developing appropriate treatment plans with measurable goals, delivering effective interventions, adapting therapy for individual patient progress/limitations, and ensuring patient safety during therapy sessions?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in patient assessment leading to incorrect treatment plans; uses ineffective or unsafe interventions; unable to adapt therapy for patient tolerance or progress; overlooks critical safety risks during sessions.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in assessment or treatment planning; requires frequent checks on intervention effectiveness or safety; struggles with adapting therapy for changing patient needs; needs significant help in applying knowledge to complex cases.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine assessments and develop standard treatment plans; delivers common interventions effectively most of the time; follows basic safety protocols consistently; can adapt therapy with guidance.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in assessment and develops comprehensive, goal-oriented treatment plans; adept at adapting therapy techniques for challenging patients or complex presentations; proficient in managing patient safety during a range of interventions; provides valuable patient education.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior assessment and develops innovative, highly effective treatment plans tailored to complex needs; consistently optimizes patient outcomes through skilled intervention and adaptation; identifies potential safety issues before they occur; contributes to developing or improving treatment protocols based on expertise and observed outcomes.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new evidence-based treatment techniques/protocols, use of new therapeutic equipment, software updates (EMR, scheduling), evolving documentation standards, or implementation of new therapy programs?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new techniques, equipment, or protocols; refuses to use updated systems; hinders implementation of changes in therapy practice.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new practices or equipment.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new techniques, equipment, or protocols at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new evidence-based practices, equipment, or software features; proficient in new clinical processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve therapy practice; actively seeks out training on new or advanced techniques; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new approaches or programs.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing a specific caseload, leading group therapy sessions, training students/new staff, assisting with complex patient transfers or treatments, or participating in departmental projects (e.g., outcome measure collection, program development, safety initiatives)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond seeing assigned patients; refuses to help colleagues with difficult patients or tasks; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned (e.g., trains only when forced); needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., managing a standard caseload, leading a routine group); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a complex caseload, effectively mentoring a student); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like outcome data collection or protocol development.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex patient populations, leading impactful programs (e.g., specialized group therapy), or leading departmental projects (e.g., developing a new service line, improving patient education materials); is a driving force for program advancement.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and output (patient progress, documentation completeness) even without direct supervision? Can the person be trusted to independently manage their assigned caseload, plan and deliver effective treatments, follow precautions, and document accurately and timely?

  • 1-2: Clinical work quality is highly inconsistent (poor assessments, ineffective treatments); frequently misses documentation deadlines or provides incomplete notes; cannot be trusted to manage patients without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (e.g., neglecting precautions).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses documentation deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on assessment accuracy, treatment effectiveness, or adherence to precautions.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine patient care; generally manages a standard caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to follow standard treatment plans and precautions with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Clinical work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably manages assigned caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to handle most patient care tasks independently, including complex cases; meticulous with following precautions and safety procedures.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers clinical work of exceptional quality and accuracy (superior assessments, impactful treatments); always manages caseload effectively and completes documentation promptly and thoroughly; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability, quality, and safety in patient care.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to practice within their assigned scope of practice/privileges (e.g., specific interventions, equipment use, administering tests) and consistently report changes in patient status (deterioration, adverse reactions to therapy), safety incidents (falls during therapy, equipment malfunction), significant findings from assessment, or any other critical issues to the appropriate medical team or supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope of practice or privileges; fails to report severe changes in patient status, safety incidents, or critical assessment findings; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds scope or attempts interventions outside expertise without consultation; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor falls missed); may delay reporting significant issues like patient deterioration or equipment failure.

  • 5-6: Generally practices within assigned scope of practice/privileges; reports major changes in patient status, safety incidents, and significant assessment findings as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently practices strictly within scope of practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical findings (changes in status, adverse events during therapy), safety incidents (including near misses), and significant assessment findings to the relevant medical team and supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and care planning.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their scope and limitations, consulting others appropriately; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle changes in status, potential safety risks, unexpected assessment findings), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems for clinical issues.

• B4: Is the person committed to optimizing patient function and rehabilitation outcomes and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues with caseloads, assist with departmental initiatives (e.g., accreditation readiness, quality improvement projects, developing patient education materials), or contribute positively to the therapy service's and hospital's reputation for patient care?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the service's success or patient outcomes; only does the absolute minimum required patient contact; refuses to help colleagues with workload or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned patient care but shows little interest in the team or departmental goals; rarely helps others with caseloads or difficult patients; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned patient care duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to patient rehabilitation and the therapy service; willingly supports colleagues with heavy caseloads or challenging patients; actively participates in departmental initiatives like quality improvement tasks or developing protocols; represents the therapy service positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing patient function and outcomes through advanced therapy practice; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and optimal patient care (e.g., volunteering for extra sessions, developing specialized programs); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the therapy service's reputation for excellence in patient rehabilitation.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts/appointments, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent patient needs (e.g., STAT consults, covering sick calls), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for patient care continuity or workload peaks?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift/appointment coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent patient needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent patient needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts/appointments; demonstrates some flexibility for urgent patient needs or coverage.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality for all clinical activities; highly reliable for covering assigned caseloads and adjusting to urgent patient needs; willingly flexible with scheduling and works extra time when needed due to high volume or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for caseload coverage and immediately available for urgent patient needs or emergencies; highly proactive in ensuring patient care continuity, often anticipating needs for extra time during critical periods.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow assessment forms, treatment protocols/pathways, safety checklists, and equipment maintenance procedures? How well do they document patient assessments, treatment sessions, progress, interventions, education, and goals in the EMR according to departmental and hospital standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from protocols or safety procedures (e.g., skips safety checks, fails to follow treatment pathway); documentation in EMR is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; treatment notes lack essential information; creates major safety/compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from protocols or forgets steps in procedures/assessments; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing measurements, vague goals); needs frequent reminders about documentation standards and safety protocols.

  • 5-6: Generally follows protocols and safety procedures correctly for routine patients; documentation in EMR is adequate for standard sessions and assessments; complies with most requirements for timely and complete notes.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant protocols and safety procedures meticulously; documentation in EMR is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all patients, including complex cases; understands the importance of thorough documentation for communication, billing, and legal compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all protocols and procedures and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail and functional relevance in notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., patients seen, sessions completed, documentation finished) compared to other therapists with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality of care and documentation accuracy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume (patients seen, notes completed) is very low; requires excessive time per patient, causing significant delays in patient progression or burdening the schedule.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers in managing caseload/workflow; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete sessions or documentation, occasionally impacting patient flow or quality.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently manages an expected volume of patients/sessions; completes tasks (sessions, documentation) within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and safety.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume (patients seen, sessions completed, notes) is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality of care, accurate assessment, and thorough documentation; manages caseload and transitions effectively.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient in managing a high volume of clinical work; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own workflow and helps optimize scheduling/processes for others; is a high-productivity therapist who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and patient access.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of therapy work (e.g., precise measurements during assessment, correct execution of interventions, accurate documentation of progress/goals, monitoring patient response/vitals, ensuring proper equipment setup), which directly impacts the effectiveness and safety of patient care?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., inaccurate measurements, incorrect technique, overlooking vital sign changes, poor equipment setup); lacks attention to detail, leading to ineffective or unsafe treatments and unreliable data.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during assessment or treatment; attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard patient care; work is generally accurate for common procedures and documentation.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex assessments, challenging interventions, and monitoring; high accuracy in measurements, technique, and documentation; effectively monitors patient response and identifies subtle changes.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of therapy (assessment, intervention, documentation, monitoring); meticulously verifies every detail and identifies potential issues before they impact patient care or safety; consistently produces superior outcomes; is a champion for clinical accuracy, quality, and patient safety.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the therapy service and the hospital when interacting with patients/families, colleagues (PT, OT, ST), physicians (PMR, specialists), nurses, and other healthcare professionals?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients, families, or staff; creates a negative impression of the therapy service/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with patients, negativity with colleagues); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards patient concerns, poor communication with nurses); occasionally represents the therapy service poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, families, and other staff; provides standard communication and care; represents the therapy service appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/families, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common questions or concerns; represents the therapy service and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional, compassionate, and collaborative behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and supportive attitude in all interactions; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the therapy service and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the therapy service (across disciplines, e.g., PT, OT, ST) and with colleagues within their own discipline (e.g., assisting with patients, co-treating, sharing knowledge)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., physicians, nurses, social work, case management) regarding patient goals, progress, discharge planning, or barriers?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the therapy team or with other disciplines; refuses to assist colleagues or participate in interdisciplinary discussions; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments, causing significant delays and friction in patient care coordination.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate within the therapy team or across disciplines; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when patient care or discharge issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with therapy team members and other disciplines when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine patient care updates or discharge planning.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports therapy team members and colleagues in other disciplines (e.g., discusses patient approach, assists with challenging patients, participates in team meetings); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (medical teams, nursing, social work) during rounds, care conferences, and in addressing patient care issues.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within the therapy service (interdisciplinary collaboration) and across the hospital; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with medical teams, nursing, social work, and case management; is an integral and valued part of the interdisciplinary care team, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that directly impacts patient outcomes and transitions of care.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the therapy team (intra- or inter-disciplinary) or between therapy and other hospital departments regarding patient care plans, goals, interventions, scheduling, or communication breakdowns?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with other disciplines or medical teams about treatment approach, blaming others); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements within the team or with other services; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to patient care plans or communication issues.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately and professionally; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient care or scheduling.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., discusses differing opinions respectfully with colleagues or medical team, clarifies misunderstandings with nursing calmly); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating complex clinical discussions and disagreements; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the therapy service or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve interdisciplinary issues effectively, improving overall patient care coordination and team dynamics.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their clinical knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members (colleagues, aides), students, and providing education to patients/families and other medical/nursing staff on relevant topics (e.g., mobility, safety transfers, swallowing strategies, cognitive exercises)?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds clinical knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff/students/patients to learn; refuses to provide basic education to other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining clinical concepts or procedures; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or patient education topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in clinical training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues and students; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful education to patients/families and medical/nursing staff upon request or proactively on relevant topics.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training, coaching, and education; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new staff and students; consistently provides impactful, high-quality education to patients/families (improving adherence and outcomes) and other healthcare staff (enhancing understanding of therapy roles and strategies); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for clinical skill development and interdisciplinary learning.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., staying current with clinical literature/evidence, learning new techniques/equipment, attending conferences/webinars, pursuing advanced certifications/degrees) to expand their clinical knowledge and skills within their therapy discipline or related areas?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in staying current with clinical literature or evidence; avoids therapy training or educational opportunities; resistant to expanding clinical knowledge or skill set.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory CE; does not seek out new clinical knowledge independently or keep fully current with evidence-based practices.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new techniques or equipment when required for their caseload; attends assigned clinical training and completes necessary CE; learns new tasks as needed for their role.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their clinical knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, literature review, workshops) to stay current with evidence, new techniques, or patient populations; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous clinical learning; actively pursues board certification or other advanced training; consistently stays ahead of new clinical evidence and best practices; integrates new knowledge into practice and shares with the team; significantly contributes to the therapy service's overall expertise and evidence-based approach.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve therapy processes, efficiency, safety, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness? Do they demonstrate initiative in troubleshooting complex patient barriers to progress, adapting treatment plans, or resolving equipment/workflow issues independently?

  • 1-2: Shows no clinical initiative; waits to be told what to do or how to treat; ignores problems with patient progress or workflow; does not attempt troubleshooting patient barriers or equipment issues.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies patient care problems (e.g., lack of progress) but doesn't attempt solutions or research alternatives; performs minimal steps in troubleshooting patient barriers or workflow issues before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic patient issues or workflow challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving therapy workflows, patient safety measures, or program effectiveness; demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most complex patient barriers to progress or resolving equipment/workflow issues independently; suggests practical clinical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving therapy services, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness; takes initiative to implement clinical improvements (with approval), potentially involving new techniques, protocols, or workflow redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual patient problems or system issues, often leading to significant positive impact on patient function and departmental operations; acts as a key clinical problem-solver and change agent.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving therapy services, patient care protocols, equipment use, documentation templates, or patient education materials? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to clinical quality, safety, program development, or interdisciplinary collaboration?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improving therapy services or patient care; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in the department.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers therapy-related suggestions, and ideas may be impractical or lack evidence; shows no interest in clinical initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving therapy operations, safety, or patient education materials; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving therapy services, safety protocols, or contributing to program development; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a safety committee, helping pilot a new piece of equipment, revising a patient handout).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving therapy operations, patient outcomes, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement a new outcome measure, developing a specialized therapy program, improving interdisciplinary communication protocols); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the therapy service's continuous improvement and innovation efforts, directly impacting patient function and quality of life.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable clinical standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequently misses critical nutritional needs or provides inappropriate/unsafe recommendations. Significantly hinders patient progress or safety.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on assessment, care planning, or intervention delivery. Misses common nutrition-related problems. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability in clinical tasks is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of a clinical dietitian role. Can perform routine nutritional assessments and develop/implement standard care plans reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common nutrition-related problems and makes appropriate basic recommendations. Contributes acceptably to patient nutritional status and safety.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific clinical areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex patient presentations, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing complex nutritional issues or seeking improvements. Provides valuable recommendations and insights to patients and medical teams.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses clinical expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for other dietitians and healthcare professionals. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing patient nutritional status and outcomes. Contributes substantially to improving nutrition practice and patient care across the service or institution.

Rephrased for Clinical Dietetics and Nutrition:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's clinical knowledge and competencies relevant to nutritional assessment, diagnosis, intervention planning (oral, enteral, parenteral), monitoring, and evaluation within their patient population (e.g., specific disease states, age groups, critical care) and understanding of medical nutrition therapy, guidelines, and products?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic nutritional assessment or common disease states; unable to apply basic nutrition support principles; frequently provides incorrect or outdated nutrition information; lacks fundamental understanding of medical nutrition therapy.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core nutritional concepts for assessment or intervention; requires frequent reminders and correction on nutrition support calculations or guidelines; struggles with understanding specific disease-related nutritional needs; slow to learn new approaches.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine patient assessment and care planning in their assigned area; can develop and implement standard nutrition interventions (diets, supplements, basic enteral feeds); understands basic medical nutrition therapy principles for common conditions.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong clinical knowledge covering a broad range of common and some complex conditions; proficient in advanced assessment and intervention techniques (e.g., complex enteral/parenteral plans, specialized diets); understands the evidence basis behind recommendations; capable of teaching basic concepts to others (patients, staff).

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's clinical nutrition knowledge; masters complex patient assessments and nutrition support strategies; deep understanding of related metabolism, disease pathology, and cutting-edge medical nutrition therapy; acts as a go-to resource for complex clinical nutrition questions and challenging patient cases; proactively seeks to learn advanced specializations (e.g., CNSC, CSO).

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their clinical knowledge and skills in performing nutritional assessments, identifying nutrition-related problems (NRPs), making evidence-based recommendations for nutrition care, interpreting lab data relevant to nutrition, calculating nutrient needs/feeds, and contributing to patient care decisions on medical teams?

  • 1-2: Frequently misses critical NRPs (e.g., severe malnutrition, significant feeding intolerance, refeeding risk); unable to interpret lab data relevant to nutrition status; provides inappropriate or unsafe recommendations for nutrition support; does not effectively contribute to patient care discussions.

  • 3-4: Misses common NRPs or identifies them inconsistently; struggles with interpreting relevant lab data; recommendations are often generic or lack sufficient evidence basis; requires significant guidance in applying knowledge to patient cases.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge to identify common NRPs in routine patient assessments; provides appropriate basic recommendations based on standard guidelines; interprets essential lab data (e.g., electrolytes, protein markers) relevant to nutrition; performs routine calculations correctly; contributes adequately to basic patient care discussions.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in assessment and identifies a wide range of NRPs (including some complex ones); provides clear, evidence-based, and practical recommendations; skilled at interpreting complex lab data and incorporating into recommendations; effectively contributes to medical rounds and discussions, influencing nutrition care decisions positively.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior assessment and identifying subtle or complex NRPs; recommendations are consistently highly impactful, evidence-based, and tailored to individual patient needs; master of interpreting all relevant lab/clinical data; proactively optimizes nutrition therapy and anticipates potential issues; is a critical contributor to complex patient care decisions and is highly valued by medical teams for their clinical acumen.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes in hospital formulary (enteral/parenteral products), evolving nutritional guidelines (e.g., ASPEN, ESPEN), implementation of new nutrition protocols (e.g., refeeding, specific disease pathways), changes in EMR functionalities related to nutrition assessment/ordering, or new patient care models?

  • 1-2: Actively resists adopting new guidelines, products, or using updated EMR systems; refuses to adapt to formulary changes; hinders implementation of new nutrition protocols or workflows.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new products, guidelines, or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new products, guidelines, protocols, or system functionalities at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes (formulary, guidelines, protocols); shows eagerness to learn and implement new evidence-based practices or EMR features related to nutrition; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve practice; actively seeks out information on new products, guidelines, and protocols; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early adopter and advocate for new nutrition initiatives.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibilities such as managing a specific patient population/unit (e.g., ICU, Oncology), leading nutrition-related patient education programs, assisting with complex nutrition support cases, or participating in departmental projects (e.g., malnutrition screening program, enteral feeding protocol development, presenting at grand rounds)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond seeing assigned patients; refuses to help others with complex cases; shows no interest in contributing to projects or education programs.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted to manage specific units or participate in projects; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., managing a standard unit caseload); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with education or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., covering a complex unit effectively, developing and delivering a patient education session); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like protocol development or QI projects.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex patient populations, leading impactful nutrition programs (e.g., specialized education series), or leading departmental projects (e.g., implementing a new screening tool, optimizing enteral feeding administration); is a driving force for program advancement.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy in nutritional assessments, interventions, and documentation, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently manage their assigned patient load, monitor patient response, follow up on recommendations, and document accurately and timely in the EMR?

  • 1-2: Clinical work quality is highly inconsistent (poor assessments, unsafe recommendations); frequently misses documentation deadlines or provides incomplete notes; cannot be trusted to manage patients without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (e.g., missed malnutrition diagnoses, incorrect feed rates).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses documentation deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on assessment accuracy, intervention appropriateness, or adherence to protocols.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine patient care; generally manages a standard caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to follow standard care plans and documentation procedures with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Clinical work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably manages assigned caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to handle most clinical nutrition tasks independently, including complex cases; meticulous with monitoring and follow-up.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers clinical work of exceptional quality and accuracy (superior assessments, highly effective interventions); always manages caseload effectively and completes documentation promptly and thoroughly; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; documentation is exemplary; acts as a benchmark for dependability, quality, and safety in patient nutrition care.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to practice within their assigned scope of practice/privileges (e.g., assessing nutritional status, making diet/supplement recommendations, ordering lab tests/supplements per protocol, initiating/adjusting enteral/parenteral nutrition if privileged) and consistently report significant changes in patient nutritional status, feeding intolerance, adverse reactions to nutrition support, identified prescribing errors related to nutrition, or any other critical issues to the appropriate medical team or supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope of practice or privileges; fails to report severe changes in nutritional status, significant feeding issues, or critical findings; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds scope or makes recommendations outside expertise without consultation; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor feeding issues missed); may delay reporting significant issues like severe intolerance or critical weight loss.

  • 5-6: Generally practices within assigned scope of practice/privileges; reports major changes in nutritional status, feeding issues, and significant findings as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently practices strictly within scope of practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical findings (changes in status, feeding intolerance, adverse events), near misses, and significant issues (identified prescribing errors related to nutrition) to the relevant medical team and supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and care planning.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their scope and limitations, consulting others appropriately; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle changes in nutritional status, potential refeeding risk, feeding tube complications, medication issues impacting nutrition), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems for nutrition issues.

• B4: Is the person committed to optimizing patient nutritional status and outcomes and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues with caseloads, assist with departmental initiatives (e.g., accreditation readiness, quality improvement projects, developing patient education materials), or contribute positively to the nutrition service's and hospital's reputation for patient care?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the service's success or patient outcomes; only does the absolute minimum required patient contact; refuses to help colleagues with workload or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned patient care but shows little interest in the team or departmental goals; rarely helps others with caseloads or difficult patients; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned patient care duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to patient nutrition and the dietetics service; willingly supports colleagues with heavy caseloads or challenging patients; actively participates in departmental initiatives like quality improvement tasks, protocol development, or patient education efforts; represents the nutrition service positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing patient nutritional status and outcomes through advanced nutrition practice; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and optimal patient care (e.g., providing extra education sessions, assisting with complex PN initiation); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the nutrition service's reputation for excellence in patient care.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts/patient visits/rounds, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent patient needs (e.g., STAT consults, covering sick calls), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for patient care continuity or workload peaks?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift/patient visit/round coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent patient needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent patient needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts/visits/rounds; demonstrates some flexibility for urgent patient needs or coverage.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality for all clinical activities; highly reliable for covering assigned caseloads and adjusting to urgent patient needs; willingly flexible with scheduling and works extra time when needed due to high volume or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for caseload coverage and immediately available for urgent patient needs or emergencies (e.g., new consults on complex patients); highly proactive in ensuring patient care continuity, often anticipating needs for extra time during critical periods.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow assessment protocols, nutrition support guidelines, patient education standards, and documentation standards in the EMR? How well do they document patient assessments, care plans, interventions (e.g., diet orders, supplements, tube feeding rates), monitoring, education, and outcomes in the EMR according to departmental and hospital standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from protocols or guidelines (e.g., skips assessment steps, fails to follow feeding protocols); documentation in EMR is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; treatment notes lack essential information; creates major safety/compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from protocols or forgets steps in assessment/care planning; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing calorie/protein intake, vague recommendations); needs frequent reminders about documentation standards and protocols.

  • 5-6: Generally follows protocols and guidelines correctly for routine patients; documentation in EMR is adequate for standard assessments and interventions; complies with most requirements for timely and complete notes.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant protocols and guidelines meticulously; documentation in EMR is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all patients, including complex cases; understands the importance of thorough documentation for communication, billing, and legal compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all protocols and procedures and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on challenging cases, complex PN/EN adjustments); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., patients assessed, interventions completed, education sessions delivered, documentation finished) compared to other clinical dietitians with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality of care and documentation accuracy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume (patients seen, notes completed) is very low; requires excessive time per patient, causing significant delays in patient care or burdening the schedule.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers in managing caseload/workflow; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete assessments, interventions, or documentation, occasionally impacting patient flow or quality.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently manages an expected volume of patients/tasks for their assigned area; completes tasks (assessments, interventions, documentation) within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and safety.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume (patients assessed, interventions, notes) is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality of care, accurate assessment, and thorough documentation; manages caseload and transitions effectively.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient in managing a high volume of complex clinical work; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own workflow and helps optimize processes for others; is a high-productivity dietitian who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and patient access.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of clinical nutrition work (e.g., collecting assessment data, calculating nutrient needs/PN/EN formulations, interpreting lab data/drug interactions, identifying errors in diet orders, providing precise patient education), which directly impacts the effectiveness and safety of nutrition therapy?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., inaccurate calculations, overlooking significant drug-nutrient interactions, missing refeeding risk, incorrect diet order entry); lacks attention to detail, leading to ineffective or unsafe interventions and unreliable data.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during assessment or care planning; attention to detail is inconsistent; clinical work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard patient care; work is generally accurate for common procedures and documentation.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex assessments, challenging PN/EN formulations, and monitoring parameters; high accuracy in calculations, interpreting data, and identifying potential issues; effectively validates own clinical findings.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of clinical nutrition (assessment, planning, calculation, monitoring, education); meticulously verifies every detail and identifies potential errors made by others (prescribers, data entry, lab reports) before they impact patient care; is a champion for clinical accuracy and patient safety in nutrition therapy.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the nutrition service and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may have complex relationships with food/body image), colleagues (other dietitians, DTRs), physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients, families, or staff; creates a negative impression of the nutrition service/hospital through interactions (e.g., judgmental about eating habits, argumentative with medical team); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards patient concerns, poor communication with nurses); occasionally represents the nutrition service poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, families, and other staff; provides standard patient care and communication; represents the nutrition service appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/families, colleagues, and staff from other departments (medical teams, nursing); effectively addresses common questions or concerns; represents the nutrition service and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional, compassionate, and collaborative behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and supportive attitude in all interactions, particularly with sensitive patient topics; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the nutrition service and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the nutrition service (dietitians, DTRs) and with colleagues in related areas (e.g., food service)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., physicians, nurses, pharmacists, therapy services, social work, case management) regarding patient nutritional status, care plans, feeding issues, or discharge planning?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the nutrition team or with food service; refuses to assist colleagues with caseloads; avoids or actively hinders interactions with medical teams or other departments, causing significant delays and friction in patient care coordination.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate within the nutrition team or with food service; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when patient nutrition issues or discharge planning arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with nutrition team members and food service when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine patient nutrition updates or discharge planning.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports nutrition team members and colleagues in related areas (e.g., discusses complex cases, assists with heavy workload); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (medical teams, nursing, pharmacy, therapy) during rounds, care conferences, and in addressing patient nutrition issues.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within the nutrition service and across the hospital; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with medical teams, nursing, pharmacy, and other staff; is an integral and valued part of the interdisciplinary care team, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that directly impacts patient nutritional status and outcomes.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the nutrition team or between nutrition and medical teams/other services regarding nutritional care plans, recommendations, feeding orders, or communication breakdowns?

  • 1-2: Avoids clinical disagreements or actively escalates them (e.g., arguing with medical team about nutrition orders, blaming food service); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements within the team or with other services; may withdraw or become defensive when challenged on recommendations; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to nutritional care or communication issues.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately and professionally; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding nutritional care or patient feeding.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., discusses differing opinions respectfully with medical team, clarifies misunderstandings with nursing calmly); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient nutrition care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating complex clinical discussions and disagreements regarding nutrition; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the nutrition service or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve interdisciplinary issues effectively, improving overall patient nutrition care coordination and team dynamics.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their clinical nutrition knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members (dietitians, DTRs), students, and providing education to patients/families and other medical/nursing staff on relevant topics (e.g., specific diets, tube feeding management, nutrition support principles, malnutrition identification)?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds clinical nutrition knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff/students/patients to learn; refuses to provide basic education to other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining clinical nutrition concepts or procedures; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or patient education topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in clinical nutrition training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues and students; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful education to patients/families and medical/nursing staff upon request or proactively on relevant nutrition topics.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training, coaching, and education; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new dietitians, DTRs, and students; consistently provides impactful, high-quality education to patients/families (improving adherence and outcomes) and other healthcare staff (enhancing understanding of medical nutrition therapy); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for clinical skill development and interdisciplinary learning.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., staying current with clinical nutrition literature/guidelines, learning about new disease states/specialties, attending conferences/webinars, pursuing advanced certifications/degrees) to expand their clinical nutrition knowledge and skills?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in staying current with clinical nutrition literature or guidelines; avoids nutrition training or educational opportunities; resistant to expanding clinical knowledge or skill set.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory CE; does not seek out new clinical nutrition knowledge independently or keep fully current with evidence-based practices.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new products or guidelines when required for their caseload; attends assigned clinical training and completes necessary CE; learns new tasks as needed for their role.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their clinical nutrition knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, literature review, workshops) to stay current with evidence, new products, or patient populations; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous clinical nutrition learning; actively pursues board certification or other advanced training; consistently stays ahead of new clinical evidence, guidelines, and best practices; integrates new knowledge into practice and shares with the team; significantly contributes to the nutrition service's overall expertise and evidence-based approach.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve nutrition assessment processes, care planning efficiency, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness? Do they demonstrate initiative in researching and resolving complex nutrition-related patient problems or system/workflow issues independently?

  • 1-2: Shows no clinical nutrition initiative; waits to be told what to assess or recommend; ignores problems with patient nutritional status or workflow; does not attempt troubleshooting patient feeding issues or system problems.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies patient care problems (e.g., poor intake) but doesn't attempt solutions or research alternatives; performs minimal steps in troubleshooting patient nutrition issues or workflow problems before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic patient issues or workflow challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving nutrition workflows, patient care processes, or program effectiveness; demonstrates initiative in researching and resolving most complex nutrition-related patient problems or system/workflow issues independently; suggests practical clinical nutrition solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving nutrition services, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness; takes initiative to implement clinical improvements (with approval), potentially involving new protocols, assessment tools, or workflow redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in researching and resolving complex or unusual patient nutrition problems or system issues, often leading to significant positive impact on patient nutritional status and departmental operations; acts as a key clinical problem-solver and change agent.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving nutrition services, patient care protocols, screening tools, documentation templates, or patient education materials? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to clinical quality, safety (e.g., refeeding syndrome prevention), program development, or interdisciplinary collaboration?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improving nutrition services or patient care; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in the department.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers nutrition-related suggestions, and ideas may be impractical or lack evidence; shows no interest in clinical initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving nutrition operations, safety, or patient education materials; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving nutrition services, safety protocols (e.g., malnutrition screening), or contributing to program development; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a QI project, helping pilot a new screening tool, revising patient handouts).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving nutrition operations, patient outcomes, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement a new nutrition support protocol, developing a specialized clinic, improving interdisciplinary communication on nutrition care); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the nutrition service's continuous improvement and innovation efforts, directly impacting patient health and recovery.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable clinical standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequently misses critical patient needs (e.g., safety risks, core psychosocial issues) or provides inappropriate/unsafe interventions/recommendations. Significantly hinders patient progress or safety.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on assessment, treatment planning, or intervention delivery. Misses common mental health/psychosocial problems. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability in clinical tasks is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the behavioral health role. Can perform routine assessments and interventions reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common mental health/psychosocial issues and makes appropriate basic recommendations. Contributes acceptably to patient well-being and safety protocols.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific clinical areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex patient presentations, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing complex psychosocial/behavioral issues or seeking improvements. Provides valuable insights and recommendations to patients and medical teams.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses clinical expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for other behavioral health staff and healthcare professionals. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing patient mental health, well-being, and outcomes. Contributes substantially to improving behavioral health practice and integrated care across the service or institution.

Rephrased for a Behavioral Health Sciences setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's clinical knowledge and competencies relevant to psychosocial and mental health assessment, crisis intervention, therapeutic modalities, diagnosis (within scope of practice), understanding of common mental health conditions, and use of behavioral health assessment tools/EMR functionalities?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic assessment techniques or common mental health conditions; unable to apply basic therapeutic principles; frequently provides incorrect or unsafe information/recommendations; lacks fundamental understanding of behavioral health practice.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core clinical concepts for assessment or intervention; requires frequent reminders and correction on techniques or rationale; struggles with understanding specific conditions or using assessment tools/EMR features; slow to learn new approaches.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine patient assessment and intervention in their role; can perform standard assessments and use common therapeutic techniques with standard supervision; understands basic mental health conditions and safety protocols.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong clinical knowledge covering a broad range of common and some complex mental health conditions and psychosocial issues; proficient in advanced assessment techniques and therapeutic modalities relevant to their discipline; understands the evidence basis behind interventions; capable of teaching basic concepts to others (patients, staff).

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their discipline's clinical knowledge; masters complex patient assessments and intervention strategies; deep understanding of psychopathology, psychological/social theories, and evidence-based practice; acts as a go-to resource for complex clinical questions and challenging patient cases; proactively seeks to learn advanced techniques and specializations.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their clinical knowledge and skills in performing psychosocial/mental health assessments, identifying behavioral/emotional/social problems, developing appropriate care plans with patient-centered goals, delivering effective interventions (counseling, therapy, psychoeducation, resource connection), adapting therapy for individual patient needs/progress, performing risk assessments, and contributing to patient care decisions?

  • 1-2: Frequently misses critical behavioral health issues or safety risks (e.g., suicide/homicide risk); unable to perform accurate assessments or develop appropriate care plans; uses ineffective or unsafe interventions; overlooks critical safety risks; does not effectively contribute to patient care discussions.

  • 3-4: Misses common behavioral health issues or identifies them inconsistently; struggles with developing practical care plans or adapting interventions; needs significant help with risk assessment; recommendations are often generic or lack sufficient basis; requires significant guidance in applying knowledge to patient cases.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine assessments and develop standard care plans; delivers common interventions effectively most of the time; performs basic risk assessments with guidance; follows basic safety protocols consistently; can adapt therapy with guidance; contributes adequately to basic patient care discussions.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in assessment and identifies a wide range of behavioral health issues (including some complex ones); develops comprehensive, goal-oriented care plans; adept at adapting interventions for challenging patients; proficient in performing thorough risk assessments; effectively contributes to medical rounds and discussions, influencing care decisions positively.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior assessment and identifies subtle or complex issues; care plans are consistently highly impactful, evidence-based, and tailored to individual patient needs; consistently optimizes patient outcomes through skilled intervention and adaptation; master of complex risk assessment and safety planning; is a critical contributor to complex patient care decisions and is highly valued by medical teams for their clinical expertise and insights into patient behavior and well-being.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new therapeutic models/techniques, evidence-based guidelines for specific conditions (e.g., depression, SUD), implementation of new screening tools or protocols (e.g., suicide risk), software updates (EMR functionality for behavioral health), or implementation of new programs?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new techniques, protocols, or using updated systems; refuses to adopt new screening tools or care models; hinders implementation of changes in behavioral health practice.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new practices or tools.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new techniques, protocols, or system functionalities at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new evidence-based practices, screening tools, or EMR features related to behavioral health; proficient in new clinical processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve practice; actively seeks out training on new or advanced techniques; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new approaches or programs.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing a specific caseload or patient population (e.g., oncology, palliative care, ICU), leading group therapy sessions, training students/new staff on behavioral health topics/screening, assisting with complex patient consultations, or participating in departmental projects (e.g., screening protocol development, program evaluation, QI initiatives)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond seeing assigned patients; refuses to help colleagues with difficult patients or tasks; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned (e.g., trains only when forced); needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., managing a standard caseload, leading a routine group); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a complex patient population, effectively mentoring a student); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like protocol development or QI projects.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex patient populations, leading impactful programs (e.g., crisis intervention training for staff, new support groups), or leading departmental projects (e.g., implementing a new screening process, evaluating program effectiveness); is a driving force for program advancement.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy in assessments, interventions, and documentation, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently manage their assigned patient load, implement and adapt care plans, follow safety protocols, and document accurately and timely in the EMR?

  • 1-2: Clinical work quality is highly inconsistent (poor assessments, unsafe interventions/recommendations); frequently misses documentation deadlines or provides incomplete notes; cannot be trusted to manage patients without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (e.g., neglecting safety plans, incomplete risk assessments).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses documentation deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on assessment accuracy, intervention effectiveness, or adherence to protocols.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine patient care; generally manages a standard caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to follow standard care plans and safety protocols with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Clinical work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably manages assigned caseload and meets documentation deadlines; can be trusted to handle most clinical behavioral health tasks independently, including complex cases; meticulous with following safety protocols and monitoring.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers clinical work of exceptional quality and accuracy (superior assessments, highly effective interventions); always manages caseload effectively and completes documentation promptly and thoroughly; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; documentation is exemplary; acts as a benchmark for dependability, quality, and safety in patient behavioral health care.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to practice within their assigned scope of practice/privileges (e.g., specific assessment tools, intervention modalities, providing specific recommendations) and consistently report critical clinical findings (e.g., significant changes in mental status, acute safety risks like suicidal/homicidal ideation, child/adult protective service concerns, mandated reporting situations), near misses, or any other significant patient safety concerns to the appropriate medical team or supervisor promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope of practice or privileges; fails to report severe safety risks, mandated reporting situations, or critical findings; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds scope or attempts interventions/recommendations outside expertise without consultation; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor safety concerns missed); may delay reporting significant issues like acute suicidality or child abuse concerns.

  • 5-6: Generally practices within assigned scope of practice/privileges; reports major changes in mental status, safety risks, and mandated reporting situations as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently practices strictly within scope of practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical findings (changes in status, safety risks, mandated reporting situations), near misses, and significant patient safety concerns to the relevant medical team and supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and care planning.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their scope and limitations, consulting others appropriately; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle changes in risk level, potential safety concerns, ethical dilemmas), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems for clinical issues.

• B4: Is the person committed to improving patient mental health and well-being outcomes and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues with complex cases, assist with departmental initiatives (e.g., program evaluation, quality improvement projects, developing patient education materials), or contribute positively to the behavioral health service's and hospital's reputation for integrated care?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the service's success or patient outcomes; only does the absolute minimum required patient contact; refuses to help colleagues with workload or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned patient care but shows little interest in the team or departmental goals; rarely helps others with complex cases or consults; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned patient care duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to patient mental health and the behavioral health service; willingly supports colleagues with heavy caseloads or challenging patients; actively participates in departmental initiatives like quality improvement tasks, protocol development, or patient education efforts; represents the service positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing patient mental health, well-being, and outcomes; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and optimal patient care (e.g., providing extra support during crises, assisting with complex discharge planning); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the behavioral health service's reputation for excellence and integrated care.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts/appointments/rounds, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent patient needs (e.g., STAT consults, crisis interventions, covering sick calls), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for patient care continuity or workload peaks?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift/patient visit/round coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent patient needs/crises.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent patient needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload or crisis situations.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts/appointments/rounds; demonstrates some flexibility for urgent patient needs or coverage.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality for all clinical activities; highly reliable for covering assigned caseloads/units and adjusting to urgent patient needs/crises; willingly flexible with scheduling and works extra time when needed due to high volume or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for caseload/unit coverage and immediately available for urgent patient needs or emergencies (e.g., new consults on complex patients, crisis response); highly proactive in ensuring patient care continuity, often anticipating needs for extra time during critical periods.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow assessment protocols, intervention guidelines, safety checklists, and documentation standards in the EMR? How well do they document patient assessments, treatment sessions, interventions, risk assessments, safety plans, communication with collateral contacts/medical team, and goals in the EMR according to departmental and hospital standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from protocols or safety procedures (e.g., incomplete risk assessment, fails to document safety plan); documentation in EMR is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; notes lack essential clinical information; creates major safety/compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from protocols or forgets steps in assessment/care planning; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing details on risk factors, vague intervention notes); needs frequent reminders about documentation standards and safety protocols.

  • 5-6: Generally follows protocols and safety procedures correctly for routine patients; documentation in EMR is adequate for standard assessments and interventions; complies with most requirements for timely and complete notes.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant protocols and safety procedures meticulously; documentation in EMR is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all patients, including complex cases; understands the importance of thorough documentation for communication, billing, and legal/ethical compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all protocols and procedures and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail and clinical rationale in notes, comprehensive safety plans); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., patients assessed, sessions conducted, consults completed, documentation finished) compared to other behavioral health staff with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality of care and documentation accuracy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume (patients seen, notes completed) is very low; requires excessive time per patient, causing significant delays in patient progress or burdening the schedule/referral queue.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers in managing caseload/workflow; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete assessments, sessions, or documentation, occasionally impacting patient flow or quality.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently manages an expected volume of patients/tasks for their assigned area; completes tasks (assessments, sessions, documentation) within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and safety.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume (patients assessed, sessions completed, notes) is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality of care, accurate assessment, and thorough documentation; manages caseload and transitions effectively.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient in managing a high volume of complex clinical work; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own workflow and helps optimize processes for others; is a high-productivity behavioral health professional who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and patient access.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of behavioral health work (e.g., collecting assessment data, identifying subtle changes in mental status/risk, accurate documentation of sensitive information/safety plans, using appropriate therapeutic language), which directly impacts the effectiveness and safety of patient care?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., inaccurate risk assessment, missing key history details, misinterpreting mental status findings, poor documentation of safety plans); lacks attention to detail, leading to ineffective or unsafe interventions and unreliable data.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during assessment or session; attention to detail is inconsistent; clinical work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard patient care; work is generally accurate for common procedures and documentation.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex assessments, challenging interventions, and monitoring for subtle changes; high accuracy in collecting data, formulating clinical impressions, and documenting sensitive information; effectively monitors patient response and identifies subtle changes in status/risk.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of clinical work (assessment, intervention, documentation, monitoring); meticulously verifies every detail and identifies potential issues before they impact patient care or safety (e.g., inconsistencies in patient reporting, subtle signs of deterioration); is a champion for clinical accuracy and patient safety.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the behavioral health service and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may be distressed, resistant, or have complex needs), colleagues, physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients/families or staff; creates a negative impression of the service/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatient with distressed patients, argumentative with medical team); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards patient concerns, poor communication with nurses regarding behavioral issues); occasionally represents the behavioral health service poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, families, and other staff; provides standard patient care and communication; represents the service appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/families, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common questions or concerns related to patient behavior or mental health; represents the behavioral health service and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional, compassionate, and collaborative behavior; consistently maintains a positive, calm, and supportive attitude in all interactions, particularly with distressed or challenging patients/families; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their approach and expertise in managing complex interactions; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the behavioral health service and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the behavioral health service (e.g., peer consultation, case discussion) and with colleagues in related areas (e.g., social work, case management)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., physicians, nurses, therapy services) regarding patient mental health status, behavioral management, safety concerns, or discharge planning?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the behavioral health team or with related services; refuses to assist colleagues with complex cases; avoids or actively hinders interactions with medical teams or other departments, causing significant delays and friction in patient care coordination.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate within the behavioral health team or with other disciplines; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with medical teams or nurses when patient behavioral or mental health issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with behavioral health team members and related services when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine patient updates or discharge planning regarding mental health.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports behavioral health team members (e.g., discusses complex cases, provides peer support); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (medical teams, nursing, case management) during rounds, care conferences, and in addressing patient behavioral health issues and care plans.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within the behavioral health service and across the hospital; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with medical teams, nursing, and other staff; is an integral and valued part of the interdisciplinary care team, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that directly impacts patient mental health outcomes and safe discharge planning.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the behavioral health team or between behavioral health and medical teams/other services regarding patient management, safety plans, treatment approach, or communication breakdowns related to behavioral/mental health issues?

  • 1-2: Avoids clinical disagreements or actively escalates them (e.g., arguing with medical team about patient disposition or treatment approach); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements within the team or with other services; may withdraw or become defensive when challenged on recommendations; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to patient behavioral health management or inter-departmental communication.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately and professionally; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient care or safety planning.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., discusses differing clinical opinions respectfully with medical team, clarifies misunderstandings with nursing calmly regarding patient behavior); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating complex clinical discussions and disagreements regarding patient mental health and behavior; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the service or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve interdisciplinary issues effectively, improving overall patient care coordination and team dynamics around behavioral health needs.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their clinical behavioral health knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members, students, and providing education to patients/families and other medical/nursing staff on relevant topics (e.g., coping strategies, de-escalation techniques, impact of mental health on physical health, communication skills)?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds clinical knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff/students/patients to learn; refuses to provide basic education to other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining clinical concepts or procedures; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or patient education topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in clinical behavioral health training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues and students; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful education to patients/families and medical/nursing staff upon request or proactively on relevant topics (e.g., managing difficult behaviors, suicide risk screening).

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training, coaching, and education; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new staff and students; consistently provides impactful, high-quality education to patients/families (improving coping and outcomes) and other healthcare staff (enhancing understanding of mental health issues and improving interdisciplinary communication); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for clinical skill development and interdisciplinary learning.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., staying current with behavioral health literature/guidelines, learning new therapeutic modalities/assessment tools, attending conferences/webinars, pursuing advanced certifications/degrees) to expand their clinical knowledge and skills within behavioral health or integrated care?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in staying current with behavioral health literature or guidelines; avoids training or educational opportunities; resistant to expanding clinical knowledge or skill set.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory CE; does not seek out new clinical knowledge independently or keep fully current with evidence-based practices.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new techniques or protocols when required for their caseload; attends assigned clinical training and completes necessary CE; learns new tasks as needed for their role.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their clinical behavioral health knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, literature review, workshops) to stay current with evidence, new techniques, or patient populations; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous clinical learning; actively pursues board certification or other advanced training; consistently stays ahead of new clinical evidence, therapeutic approaches, and best practices; integrates new knowledge into practice and shares with the team; significantly contributes to the service's overall expertise and evidence-based approach.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve behavioral health processes, assessment efficiency, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness? Do they demonstrate initiative in researching and resolving complex psychosocial barriers to patient care, adapting treatment plans, or resolving system/workflow issues related to behavioral health independently?

  • 1-2: Shows no clinical initiative; waits to be told what to assess or how to intervene; ignores problems with patient progress or workflow; does not attempt troubleshooting patient barriers or system issues.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies patient care problems (e.g., lack of engagement) but doesn't attempt solutions or research alternatives; performs minimal steps in troubleshooting patient barriers or workflow problems before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic patient issues or workflow challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving behavioral health workflows, patient safety measures, or program effectiveness; demonstrates initiative in researching and resolving most complex patient barriers to progress or resolving system/workflow issues independently; suggests practical clinical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving behavioral health services, patient outcomes, or program effectiveness; takes initiative to implement clinical improvements (with approval), potentially involving new techniques, protocols, or workflow redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in researching and resolving complex or unusual patient problems or system issues, often leading to significant positive impact on patient well-being and departmental operations; acts as a key clinical problem-solver and change agent.

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving behavioral health services, patient care protocols, screening tools, documentation templates, or patient education materials? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to clinical quality, safety (e.g., suicide prevention), program development, or interdisciplinary collaboration?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improving services or patient care; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in the department.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers behavioral health-related suggestions, and ideas may be impractical or lack evidence; shows no interest in clinical initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving operations, safety, or patient education materials; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving behavioral health services, safety protocols (e.g., suicide risk screening), or contributing to program development; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a QI project, helping pilot a new screening tool, revising patient handouts).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving behavioral health operations, patient outcomes, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement a new screening tool system-wide, developing a specialized treatment program, improving interdisciplinary communication on behavioral health care); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the behavioral health service's continuous improvement and innovation efforts, directly impacting patient well-being and integrated care.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., patient misidentification, critical measurement errors, significant safety lapses). Significantly hinders clinic workflow or patient safety/diagnosis.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures or techniques. Makes common errors (e.g., inaccurate measurements, frequent test retakes). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine procedures and patient workups reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common technical issues and follows basic safety protocols. Contributes acceptably to clinic workflow and data collection standards.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex procedures or patient presentations, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing technical issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on patient findings or workflow.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing patient care, ensuring accuracy, and improving clinic operations. Consistently delivers high-quality work even in challenging situations.

Rephrased for a Vision Care Team setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's competencies in core vision care functions relevant to their specific role/modality (e.g., patient history taking, visual acuity measurement, tonometry, refractometry, lensometry, diagnostic equipment operation - OCT, visual field, fundus camera, knowledge of eye anatomy/common conditions, sterile technique, ophthalmic medications/drops)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic eye anatomy, common conditions, or procedures; requires constant step-by-step guidance for fundamental tasks (e.g., VA measurement, using tonometer); frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational knowledge.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core procedures or concepts; requires frequent reminders and correction on techniques or terminology; struggles with basic equipment use or understanding common conditions; slow to learn new tests or protocols.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine patient workup and procedures in their role/modality; can perform standard tests and operate common equipment with standard supervision; understands basic ocular anatomy and common conditions.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and equipment for the role (including some advanced tests); understands the 'why' behind procedures (e.g., specific tests for certain conditions, technique adjustments); capable of teaching basic concepts or procedures to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's competencies; masters complex procedures and diagnostic equipment operation; deep knowledge of eye conditions, medications, and related systemic diseases; acts as a go-to resource for technical questions and complex patient presentations; proactively seeks to learn advanced tests or procedures.

• 
  

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their vision care knowledge and skills in performing accurate patient workups and diagnostic tests, obtaining high-quality images/data, adapting techniques for difficult patients/situations, troubleshooting equipment or technical issues, and assisting physicians/optometrists in patient assessment and care?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in measurements or test performance resulting in unreliable data or non-diagnostic images; overlooks critical patient history or findings; unable to perform basic troubleshooting; significantly hinders the physician/optometrist's ability to assess the patient.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application, resulting in frequent test retakes or suboptimal data; requires frequent checks for accuracy in measurements or technique; struggles with adapting for difficult patients; needs significant help with troubleshooting equipment or technical issues.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine workups and tests accurately most of the time; achieves adequate image/data quality for standard exams; follows basic safety protocols consistently; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance; provides adequate assistance to physicians/optometrists for routine patients.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in workups and consistently obtains high-quality data/images; adept at adapting techniques for challenging patients (e.g., pediatric, low vision, anxious) or unusual presentations; proficient in troubleshooting moderately complex equipment or technical issues independently; effectively anticipates physician/optometrist needs during exams.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior accuracy and consistently obtains high-quality, diagnostic data/images; identifies potential issues with patient presentation or equipment before they impact findings; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual problems (equipment, patient, data); contributes valuable observations and insights to the physician/optometrist during assessment; is a critical asset in complex patient evaluations.

• 
  

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new testing protocols, software updates (EMR, imaging software), new diagnostic equipment, evolving clinical guidelines (e.g., for glaucoma testing), or implementation of new patient care workflows?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures, equipment, or software; refuses to use updated systems or adopt new protocols; hinders implementation of changes in the clinic.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new equipment or protocols.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/technologies/protocols at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new SOPs once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new tests, equipment, or software features; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn and improve; actively seeks out training on new technologies or advanced procedures; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or clinical protocols.

• 
  

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing specific diagnostic equipment, training new staff on procedures, assisting with complex procedures or surgeries, or participating in departmental projects (e.g., QA initiatives, accreditation tasks, patient flow improvement)?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others with difficult patients or exams; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned (e.g., trains only when forced); needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., covering a specific room, helps with supplies); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., becoming the super user for a specific piece of equipment, training a new hire effectively); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental initiatives like QA or protocol review.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in training, mentoring, or leading significant departmental projects (e.g., developing a new testing checklist, optimizing patient flow for a modality); is a driving force for progress and improvement.

• 
  

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and output (data accuracy, number of completed workups/tests) even without direct supervision? Can the person be trusted to independently follow procedures for patient identification, screening, workup measurements, testing protocols, and documentation?

  • 1-2: Data quality/accuracy is highly inconsistent; frequently fails to complete assigned patient workups/tests; cannot be trusted to perform basic tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (misidentification, measurement errors).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses completing assigned tasks or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on patient identification, measurement accuracy, or following testing protocols; documentation is often incomplete.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine patient workups and tests; generally meets assigned volume; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard patient identification, screening, measurement, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably meets or exceeds assigned volume; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from patient check-in to documentation, including complex cases; meticulous with safety checks.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional quality (superior data/images) and accuracy; always meets or exceeds volume expectations; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability, quality, and safety.

• 
  

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within the limits of authority assigned to him/her (e.g., performing specific tests, administering drops per protocol, assisting with procedures)? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors equipment malfunctions, patient issues during workup/testing (adverse reactions to drops, discomfort, inability to perform test), critical findings from workup (sudden vision loss, extremely high pressure), or any other significant issues promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope or privileges (e.g., administers drops without authorization, interprets findings outside scope); fails to report major equipment issues, patient emergencies during workup, or critical findings; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor equipment glitches missed); may delay reporting significant issues like patient reactions or critical workup findings.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority and privileges; reports major equipment malfunctions, patient issues during workup/testing, and critical findings as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of practice and privileges; reliably and promptly reports all required equipment issues, patient issues during workup/testing (including subtle discomfort), and critical findings (e.g., sudden VA drop, significantly elevated pressure, new symptoms) to the appropriate physician/optometrist and supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and diagnosis.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (equipment performance changes, subtle patient discomfort/symptoms, unexpected workup findings), even minor ones that could escalate or impact diagnosis; acts as a key safeguard in the reporting chain and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• 
  

• B4: Is the person committed to perform his best for the institution and go beyond the call of duty when required to support and build his department and the institution as a whole (e.g., staying late for urgent patients, helping other clinics, participating in hospital-wide safety initiatives)?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the department's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues with difficult patients or stay late for urgent cases.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others with workflow or difficult patients; avoids participation in departmental initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the department; willingly supports colleagues with workload (e.g., helps with patient flow, assists with testing); actively participates in departmental initiatives like QA audits or accreditation tasks; represents the department positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to the department and institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and patient care (e.g., staying late without being asked for urgent referrals, assisting in other areas if needed); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the department's reputation for excellence.

• 
  

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts (including on-call), consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts (e.g., evenings, weekends), and willingness to be available or put in extra time when urgently needed for patient care (e.g., STAT workups, unexpected clinic volume)?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage, including on-call; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or on-call duty; reluctant to stay extra time for urgent cases.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts and on-call duty; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs and urgent exams.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts and on-call; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for urgent patient workups, unexpected clinic volume, or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift and on-call coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical patient care needs or emergencies; always available when needed.

• 
  

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and clinical protocols for all tasks, including patient workup, safety screening, diagnostic testing, equipment maintenance, and handling of specimens/supplies? How well do they document patient data, history, measurements, test results, consent, and any incidents in the EMR/PACS/RIS according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., skips safety questions, uses incorrect testing technique, fails to document measurements); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major safety/quality risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing measurements, incomplete history); needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs/protocols correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., basic workup notes, test results); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs/protocols meticulously; documentation in EMR/PACS/RIS is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all patients, including non-routine situations (e.g., patient challenges, incident notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for quality, safety, and compliance.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on challenging cases, complex histories); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or safety.

• 
  

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., patients worked up, tests performed, documentation finished) compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality of data, accuracy, and patient safety?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per patient, causing significant delays in clinic flow and burdening the schedule.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete workups or tests, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of patients/tests for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and safety.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume (patients worked up, tests performed, notes) is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality of data, accuracy, and patient safety; manages workload effectively and keeps clinic flow moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or patient safety; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput.

• 
  

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of vision care work (e.g., patient identification, screening responses, measurement precision, test parameter selection, data entry, documentation of critical findings), which directly impacts diagnostic accuracy and patient safety?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., misidentifies patient, records incorrect measurements, selects wrong test parameters, misses critical screening questions); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable data and major patient risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during workup or testing (e.g., minor measurement errors, incomplete screening); attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires retesting or correction due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard workups and tests; work is generally accurate for common procedures; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex measurements, challenging tests, and screening; high accuracy in patient identification, safety checks, and data entry; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of vision care work; meticulously verifies every step (patient ID, screening, measurements, test setup, data entry); consistently produces perfect or near-perfect data/images; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., order entry mistakes); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and patient safety in data acquisition.

• 
  

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the Vision Care department and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may be anxious or have visual impairments), colleagues, physicians/optometrists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients or staff; creates a negative impression of the department/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with visually impaired patients, arguing with colleagues); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., brusque with patients, poor communication with scheduling); occasionally represents the department poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients and other staff; provides standard patient care and communication; represents the department appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic (especially with visually impaired or anxious patients), and helpful; has positive interactions with patients, colleagues, and physicians/optometrists; effectively addresses common questions or concerns; represents the department and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and compassionate behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and calming attitude in all interactions, particularly with anxious or difficult patients; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and physicians/optometrists for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the Vision Care department and the hospital.

• 
  

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within Vision Care (e.g., assisting with patient flow, sharing workload, helping with breaks)? Do they actively and constructively interact with physicians/optometrists and staff from other hospital departments (e.g., scheduling, billing, medical records, nursing) to coordinate patient care, clarify orders, or resolve patient issues?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the Vision Care team; refuses to assist colleagues with patients or workload; avoids or actively hinders interactions with physicians/optometrists or other departments (scheduling, billing), causing significant delays and friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with physicians/optometrists or other departments when patient flow or order issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with physicians/optometrists and other departments for routine coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports Vision Care team members (e.g., helps with patient transitions, assists with busy workflow); engages constructively and effectively with physicians/optometrists during clinic hours and interacts effectively with staff from other departments (e.g., scheduling for urgent add-ons, billing for clarifications) to coordinate patient care efficiently.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within Vision Care and across disciplines; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with physicians/optometrists and other departments; is an integral part of the patient care process, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures timely and high-quality patient care.

• 
  

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the Vision Care team or between Vision Care and other hospital departments regarding patient scheduling, exam protocols, patient preparation, or technical issues?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with scheduling about appointment times, blaming colleagues for delays); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to workflow or inter-departmental communication.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient flow or protocols.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly discusses scheduling issues with front desk, clarifies protocol needs with a physician/optometrist respectfully); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for patient care.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to patient care coordination or technical challenges; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers between Vision Care and other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex inter-departmental issues, improving overall workflow and working relationships.

• 
  

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members, students, or providing education to patients/families on topics like using low vision aids, instilling drops, managing dry eye symptoms, or understanding a diagnostic test?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff/students/patients to learn; refuses to provide basic education to patients or other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures or patient education topics.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or patient education topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues and students; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful basic education to patients/families upon request or proactively on relevant topics.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training, coaching, and patient education; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new staff and students; consistently provides impactful, high-quality education to patients/families (improving adherence and understanding) and potentially other healthcare staff (e.g., on how to assist visually impaired patients); is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for technical skill development and patient empowerment.

• 
  

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., learning new diagnostic equipment, mastering advanced testing protocols, pursuing certifications like COA/COT, attending conferences/webinars) to expand their technical and clinical knowledge within Vision Care?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge in vision care; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new knowledge independently regarding new tests or equipment.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new procedures or operate new equipment when required; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their vision care knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, pursuing certifications) to stay current with techniques, new equipment, or protocols; learns new tasks or modalities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in vision care; actively pursues certifications in advanced areas or ophthalmic modalities; consistently stays ahead of new techniques, equipment, and best practices; shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and capabilities.

• 
  

• E2: Does he/ she proactively identify opportunities to improve Vision Care processes, workflow efficiency, data quality, or patient safety? Do they demonstrate initiative in troubleshooting technical problems with equipment or resolving complex patient workup issues before seeking assistance?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with equipment or workflow; does not attempt troubleshooting.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., poor test results) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help with equipment errors or difficult patients.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for equipment errors or patient workup challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving workflow, data quality, or safety measures (e.g., suggesting a patient instruction improvement, optimizing a test setup); demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most technical issues with equipment or resolving complex patient workup challenges independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, data quality, or patient safety; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving workflow changes or protocol adjustments; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual problems with equipment, techniques, or patients, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department.

• 
  

• E3: How often does he/ she contribute ideas or suggestions for improving Vision Care services, workflow, patient safety protocols, testing techniques, or technology use? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, safety, automation, or procedure optimization within the department?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in Vision Care.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving operations or safety; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflow, safety protocols (e.g., for dilating patients), or testing techniques; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a QA committee, helping pilot a new test).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving Vision Care operations, patient safety, data quality, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to improve patient flow, developing a new safety checklist, optimizing testing protocols); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., patient misidentification, significant data entry errors, critical compliance issues). Significantly hinders workflow or patient/staff access to services.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures or system use. Makes common errors (e.g., inaccurate data entry, frequent scheduling conflicts). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine administrative tasks reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common issues and follows basic procedures. Contributes acceptably to administrative workflow and data standards.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex processes, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on administrative efficiency or process improvement.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing administrative processes, ensuring data accuracy, and improving overall departmental/organizational efficiency and service.

Rephrased for a Health Administration setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's competencies in core administrative functions relevant to their role (e.g., EMR/HIS use, scheduling systems, medical terminology, billing/coding processes, patient registration, medical record management, HIPAA and privacy regulations, office software proficiency)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic administrative procedures or software; requires constant step-by-step guidance for fundamental tasks (e.g., scheduling, data entry); frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational knowledge (e.g., HIPAA violations, major billing errors).

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core administrative concepts or systems; requires frequent reminders and correction on procedures or software use; struggles with basic tasks or terminology; slow to learn new processes.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine administrative tasks in their role; can perform standard procedures and use common systems with standard supervision; understands basic medical terminology and privacy principles.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and systems for the role (including some complex functions); understands the 'why' behind procedures (e.g., logic of scheduling, importance of documentation details); capable of teaching basic concepts or procedures to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's administrative competencies; masters complex processes and systems; deep knowledge of relevant regulations (HIPAA, billing rules), advanced system functionalities, and best practices; acts as a go-to resource for complex administrative questions; proactively seeks to learn advanced skills or certifications.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their administrative knowledge and skills in managing records, processing data/forms, navigating systems efficiently, applying procedures (e.g., billing rules, scheduling logic), and ensuring compliance with regulations?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in data entry or processing resulting in inaccurate information, delayed workflow, or compliance issues; overlooks critical procedural steps or privacy requirements; unable to perform basic troubleshooting; significantly hinders workflow or service delivery.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application, resulting in frequent corrections or delays; requires frequent checks for accuracy in data or processing; struggles with applying complex procedures or navigating systems efficiently; needs significant help with troubleshooting administrative issues.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine administrative tasks accurately most of the time; achieves adequate data quality for standard processes; follows basic procedural and compliance requirements consistently; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and efficiency in administrative tasks; adept at applying complex procedures and navigating systems proficiently; proficient in troubleshooting moderately complex administrative issues independently; maintains strong compliance practices.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior accuracy and efficiency; identifies potential issues before they impact workflow, data integrity, or compliance; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual administrative problems (system errors, complex cases); contributes to improving procedures or systems based on expertise.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new software systems (EMR, scheduling, billing), updated administrative procedures, new regulations (e.g., coding changes, privacy updates), or changes in workflow?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures, systems, or regulations; refuses to use updated software or adopt new workflows; hinders implementation of changes in the department.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new processes or technology.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/systems/regulations at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new systems, procedures, or regulatory requirements; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn and improve; actively seeks out training on new technologies or advanced administrative tasks; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or protocols.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing specific administrative processes (e.g., billing queue, scheduling block, supply inventory), overseeing office functions, assisting with complex patient/staff inquiries, or participating in administrative projects?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others; shows no interest in contributing to projects or office management.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., covering a specific area, helping with a task); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a key process, effectively training a new staff member); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental administrative initiatives like process improvement or system testing.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing critical administrative functions, leading impactful projects (e.g., streamlining patient check-in, optimizing record retrieval), or mentoring other staff; is a driving force for operational efficiency.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of accuracy and output in administrative tasks (e.g., data entry, processing forms, scheduling) and meet deadlines, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently follow procedures for privacy, accuracy, and task completion?

  • 1-2: Accuracy is highly inconsistent; frequently misses deadlines; cannot be trusted to perform basic tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (data entry, scheduling, privacy).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on data entry, processing, or scheduling accuracy; documentation is often incomplete.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent accuracy for routine tasks; generally meets deadlines; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard administrative tasks and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Accuracy and output are consistently high; reliably meets deadlines for most administrative tasks; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from initiation to completion, including complex processes; meticulous with privacy and accuracy checks.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional accuracy and efficiency; always meets or exceeds deadlines; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability, accuracy, and compliance in administrative functions.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within their assigned authority (e.g., system access, approvals, handling sensitive data)? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors procedural errors, compliance issues (e.g., potential HIPAA breaches), system malfunctions, significant patient/staff complaints, or any other significant issues promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope or authority (e.g., accesses unauthorized data, approves requests without authorization); fails to report major system issues, compliance breaches, or significant complaints; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor system glitches missed); may delay reporting significant issues like potential HIPAA breaches or serious complaints.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports major system malfunctions, compliance issues, and significant complaints as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of authority; reliably and promptly reports all required procedural errors, compliance issues (including near misses), system malfunctions, and significant patient/staff complaints to the appropriate supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for operational efficiency and risk management.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle system errors, potential compliance concerns, process inefficiencies, challenging interactions), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in administrative operations and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• B4: Is the person committed to perform their best for the institution by effectively supporting departmental operations and, when required, go beyond standard duties to assist colleagues with administrative workload, participate in departmental initiatives, or contribute positively to the department's and institution's reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the department's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues with administrative workload or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others with administrative tasks; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the department and institution; willingly supports colleagues with heavy administrative workload (e.g., helps during peak times, covers tasks); actively participates in departmental initiatives like process improvements or accreditation support; represents the department positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing departmental operations and supporting the institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and efficiency (e.g., staying late without being asked to complete urgent tasks, assisting with unexpected administrative burdens); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the department's and institution's reputation for administrative excellence.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent administrative needs (e.g., covering reception, processing urgent requests), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for workload peaks or coverage?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent administrative needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent administrative needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs and urgent administrative tasks.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for urgent tasks or workload peaks.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical administrative needs or emergencies; always available when needed.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and administrative protocols for all tasks, including patient registration, scheduling, billing processes, data entry, record management, and handling communications? How well do they document actions, patient interactions related to admin, and system notes according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., skips registration steps, fails to follow scheduling rules, uses incorrect billing codes); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major workflow or compliance risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing registration details, incomplete billing notes); needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs/protocols correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., basic registration notes, call logs); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs/protocols meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all tasks, including non-routine situations (e.g., complex inquiries, incident notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for efficiency, compliance, and communication.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on complex interactions, comprehensive system notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of administrative work completion (e.g., appointments scheduled, patients registered, forms processed, inquiries handled) compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per task, causing significant delays in workflow and burdening the department.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of tasks for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and accuracy.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality; manages workload effectively and keeps workflow moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or compliance; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of administrative work (e.g., patient identification, demographics, scheduling details, financial information, coding, form completion, data entry), which directly impacts patient experience, billing, workflow, and data integrity?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., patient misidentification, incorrect demographics, major scheduling errors, wrong billing codes); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable data, significant workflow issues, and major compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during data entry or processing (e.g., minor spelling errors, incomplete addresses, minor scheduling conflicts); attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard processes; work is generally accurate for common administrative tasks; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex processes (e.g., complex scheduling, detailed billing entry); high accuracy in patient identification, data entry, and form completion; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of administrative work; meticulously verifies every detail (patient info, dates, codes, numbers); consistently produces perfect or near-perfect data; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., clinical staff in orders, patients on forms); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and compliance in administrative processes.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional and helpful demeanor and positively represent the department and the hospital when interacting with patients/families, visitors, colleagues within administration, and staff from other departments (clinical, medical staff, support services)?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients, visitors, or staff; creates a negative impression of the department/hospital through interactions; shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., brusque with patients/visitors, poor communication with other departments); occasionally represents the department poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and helpful demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, visitors, and other staff; provides standard customer service; represents the department appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/visitors, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common inquiries or concerns; represents the department and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and customer-service oriented behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and supportive attitude in all interactions; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the department and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within Health Administration (e.g., assisting with workload, sharing information, helping with coverage)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., clinical staff for scheduling/records, finance for billing, IT for system issues, patients/families) to resolve administrative issues, clarify information, or improve workflows?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the administrative team; refuses to assist colleagues with workload; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments (clinical, billing, etc.), causing significant delays and friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when administrative issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine administrative coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports administrative team members (e.g., helps with heavy workload, shares useful information); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments to efficiently resolve administrative issues, clarify information (e.g., patient details for billing/scheduling), or improve integrated workflows.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within Health Administration and across departments; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with clinical staff, finance, IT, and others; is an integral part of the hospital's operational flow, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures efficient patient care and departmental function.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the administrative team or between Health Administration and other hospital departments regarding scheduling conflicts, billing disputes, information requests, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with other departments about scheduling or billing, blaming colleagues for errors); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to administrative workflows or inter-departmental communication.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding administrative tasks or patient flow.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly discusses scheduling issues with clinical staff, clarifies billing disputes with patients/insurance); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to complex administrative or inter-departmental issues; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the team or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex administrative issues effectively, improving overall workflow and working relationships.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members or helping colleagues with complex administrative tasks as needed?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; expresses frustration when asked for help.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively on procedures and systems.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or improving onboarding processes; is recognized as a valuable resource for skill development within the administrative team.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., mastering new software features, learning updated procedures/regulations, attending relevant workshops/webinars, pursuing administrative certifications) to expand their administrative knowledge and skills?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding administrative knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new knowledge independently regarding new procedures or systems.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new procedures or systems when required for their role; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their administrative knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, pursuing certifications) to stay current with best practices, new systems, or regulations; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in health administration; actively pursues certifications or advanced training relevant to their role; consistently stays ahead of new administrative techniques, systems, and regulations; shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and efficiency.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively take steps to improve administrative processes, work efficiency, or service delivery? In the face of a challenge (e.g., a system error, a complex patient request, workflow bottleneck), does the person try to find solutions or resolve issues on their own initiative?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with administrative processes or systems; does not attempt troubleshooting.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., delays in processing) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help with administrative issues or system errors.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for administrative issues or system errors; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving administrative workflows, efficiency, or service delivery (e.g., suggesting a better filing system, optimizing data entry steps); demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most administrative issues or system glitches independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, workflow, or service; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving system changes or process redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual administrative problems, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department.

• E3: How often does he/ she come up with new ideas or suggest changes which can improve administrative processes, efficiency, patient experience, or support for clinical staff? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, efficiency, technology adoption, or workflow optimization within the department?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in administration.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving administrative operations or patient experience; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflows, processes, or patient interactions; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a QI project, helping pilot a new system feature).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving administrative operations, efficiency, patient satisfaction, or support for clinical teams; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to streamline registration, optimizing appointment scheduling, implementing a new communication tool); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., missing critical safety trends, failing to follow compliance procedures, inaccurate data). Significantly hinders quality improvement efforts or regulatory readiness.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures, data analysis, or regulatory interpretation. Misses common quality/safety issues. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine quality/safety tasks and data analysis reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common issues and follows basic quality procedures and reporting. Contributes acceptably to QI initiatives and compliance efforts.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex data analysis or investigations, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on quality/safety initiatives.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others in quality methodologies and safety culture. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in driving quality improvement, ensuring patient safety, and enhancing regulatory compliance. Contributes substantially to improving quality performance and fostering a safety culture hospital-wide.

Rephrased for a Quality setting:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's knowledge and competencies relevant to Quality Improvement, Patient Safety, Risk Management, Regulatory Compliance (e.g., NABH,NABL, ISO, Joint Commission), Data Analysis, Root Cause Analysis (RCA), Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), and use of Quality/Safety software/databases?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic QI/safety principles or regulations; requires constant step-by-step guidance for fundamental tasks (e.g., incident review, data collection); frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational knowledge (e.g., misinterpreting regulations, incorrect data grouping).

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core Quality/Safety concepts or regulations; requires frequent reminders and correction on methodologies or data interpretation; struggles with basic software use or understanding common compliance requirements; slow to learn new tools or regulations.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine QI/Safety tasks in their role; can perform standard data collection, incident review, and use common Quality software with standard supervision; understands basic regulatory requirements for their area.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most QI/Safety methodologies and regulations for the role (including some complex analyses or investigation techniques); understands the 'why' behind processes (e.g., regulatory intent, statistical significance); capable of explaining basic concepts or procedures to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's Quality/Safety competencies; masters complex data analysis, investigation techniques (RCA, FMEA), and regulatory interpretation; deep knowledge of quality frameworks and best practices; acts as a go-to resource for complex quality/safety questions; proactively seeks to learn advanced methodologies and certifications (e.g., CPHQ, Lean Six Sigma).

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their quality knowledge and skills in monitoring performance metrics, analyzing data to identify trends, investigating incidents, developing and implementing evidence-based improvement strategies, interpreting regulatory standards, and ensuring compliance?

  • 1-2: Frequently misinterprets data or incident findings; unable to apply QI methods effectively; recommendations are inappropriate or non-compliant; overlooks critical safety risks or regulatory requirements.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in data analysis or incident investigation; requires frequent checks for accuracy in findings or recommendations; struggles with applying QI methodologies or interpreting complex regulations; needs significant help with developing improvement plans.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine data analysis and incident review accurately most of the time; identifies common trends; follows standard QI processes; applies basic regulatory standards correctly; contributes adequately to improvement planning.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy in data analysis and incident investigation; adept at identifying a range of trends (including subtle ones); develops clear, evidence-based improvement recommendations; proficient in applying moderately complex regulatory standards; effectively contributes to QI project implementation.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior analysis and investigation; identifies potential risks or compliance gaps before they become major issues; highly proficient in complex data analysis, RCA/FMEA, and regulatory interpretation; contributes to developing and leading impactful QI initiatives or policy changes based on expertise and findings.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new quality methodologies, software updates (QI platforms, data analysis tools), evolving regulatory standards, new reporting requirements, or implementation of new quality/safety programs?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new methodologies, regulations, or software; refuses to use updated systems or adopt new reporting procedures; hinders implementation of changes in the Quality department or hospital-wide.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new processes, regulations, or tools.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new methodologies/regulations/systems at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new methodologies, updated regulations, or software features; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve; actively seeks out training on new or advanced QI/Safety concepts; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems, regulations, or programs.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing specific quality/safety reporting categories, leading incident investigations, managing data sets, training staff on quality/safety topics, assisting with audits/surveys, or participating in quality committees/projects?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others with investigations or data requests; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned (e.g., trains only when forced); needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., managing a standard data set, leading a routine investigation); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a key reporting system, effectively presenting data to a committee, training staff on a new policy); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental or hospital-wide QI/Safety initiatives.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex investigations, leading impactful QI projects, or developing and delivering key training programs; is a driving force for quality and safety initiatives.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of quality and accuracy in data collection, analysis, investigation findings, and documentation, even without direct supervision? Can the person be trusted to independently follow procedures for incident review, data validation, report generation, and documentation?

  • 1-2: Work quality (data, findings, reports) is highly inconsistent; frequently misses deadlines for reports or investigations; cannot be trusted to complete tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (inaccurate data, flawed analysis, incomplete investigations).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on data accuracy, analysis, or documentation completeness.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent quality for routine tasks; generally meets deadlines for reports/investigations; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard data collection, review, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Work quality and accuracy are consistently high; reliably meets deadlines for most tasks; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from data collection to reporting, including complex analyses or investigations; meticulous with data validation and documentation.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional quality and accuracy; always meets or exceeds deadlines; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work (data, analysis, investigations, documentation, reports); acts as a benchmark for dependability and accuracy in quality processes.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within the limits of authority assigned to him/her (e.g., access to confidential data, recommending but not mandating changes)? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors critical findings (e.g., significant safety risks, regulatory non-compliance, systemic issues identified), major investigation outcomes, or any other significant issues promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope or authority (e.g., sharing confidential data inappropriately, making unauthorized mandates); fails to report severe safety risks, non-compliance, or critical findings; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor compliance issues missed); may delay reporting significant issues like major systemic risks or audit findings.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports major safety risks, compliance issues, and critical findings as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of practice; reliably and promptly reports all required critical findings (safety risks, non-compliance, systemic issues), major investigation outcomes, and significant issues (including near misses discovered during review) to the appropriate supervisor and relevant committees; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for risk mitigation and compliance.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle safety concerns, potential compliance gaps, emerging systemic problems), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the quality/safety system and contributes to improving reporting mechanisms.

• B4: Is the person committed to promoting a culture of quality, safety, and continuous improvement within the institution and, when necessary, go beyond standard duties to support colleagues across departments with quality/safety issues, participate in hospital-wide initiatives (e.g., accreditation surveys, major QI projects), or contribute positively to the Quality department's and institution's reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to quality or safety culture; only does the absolute minimum required tasks; refuses to help colleagues or other departments with quality issues; avoids participation in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in promoting quality/safety hospital-wide; rarely helps others outside the department with quality issues; avoids participation in hospital-wide initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to departmental workflow; participates adequately in hospital-wide initiatives when asked (e.g., assists during surveys).

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to promoting quality and safety; willingly supports colleagues across departments with quality/safety questions or issues; actively participates in hospital-wide initiatives like QI projects, safety committees, or preparing for accreditation surveys.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to fostering a strong culture of quality and safety throughout the institution; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to champion best practices, support major hospital-wide initiatives, and assist departments with challenging quality/safety concerns; is a positive force for promoting a proactive safety culture; significantly contributes to the department's and institution's reputation for excellence in quality and patient safety.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts/meetings, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent quality/safety needs (e.g., STAT incident review, assisting during an unannounced survey), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for investigations, reports, or compliance deadlines?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage or critical meetings/deadlines; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent quality/safety needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent quality/safety needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload peaks.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts/meetings; demonstrates some flexibility for urgent quality/safety needs or compliance deadlines.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts/meetings and critical deadlines; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for urgent investigations, reports, or unannounced regulatory events.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for covering critical quality/safety functions and immediately available for urgent needs or emergencies (e.g., Sentinel Event investigation, unannounced survey arrival); highly proactive in ensuring quality/safety coverage, often anticipating needs for extra time during critical periods.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and protocols for all tasks, including incident reporting review, data abstraction, data analysis, investigation processes, policy management, and regulatory documentation? How well do they document findings, recommendations, actions taken, and communications in quality databases/reports according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., skips steps in investigations, fails to follow data abstraction rules, uses incorrect reporting formats); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major compliance or data integrity risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing investigation details, vague recommendations, incomplete data fields); needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs/protocols correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., basic incident reviews, data abstraction); complies with most requirements for timely and complete documentation.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs/protocols meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all tasks, including complex investigations and reports; understands the importance of thorough documentation for analysis, compliance, and legal review.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail and rationale in investigation reports, comprehensive policy notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of work completion (e.g., incident reports reviewed, investigations completed, data sets analyzed, reports generated) compared to other Quality team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per task, causing significant delays in investigations, reporting, and hindering timely QI efforts.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow or the timeliness of reports, sometimes compromising quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of tasks for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and accuracy.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality; manages workload effectively and keeps processes moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or compliance; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and the speed of quality improvement cycles.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of Quality work (e.g., data abstraction, incident review details, root cause identification, policy wording, report numbers, regulatory cross-references), which directly impacts the reliability of findings, effectiveness of improvements, and compliance?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., inaccurate data that skews results, missing critical root causes in RCA, errors in policy wording that create risk); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable findings, ineffective interventions, and major compliance risks.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during data analysis or investigation (e.g., minor data errors, incomplete timelines, vague recommendations); attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction or re-analysis by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard processes; work is generally accurate for common QI/Safety tasks; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex data sets, challenging investigations, and policy review; high accuracy in data abstraction, analysis, findings, and documentation; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of Quality work; meticulously verifies every detail (data points, incident facts, policy language, regulatory requirements); consistently produces highly reliable findings and reports; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., reporters in incident entry, staff in process execution); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and compliance in all quality functions.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional and objective demeanor and positively represent the Quality department and the hospital when interacting with staff involved in incidents, departments undergoing review/audits, colleagues within Quality, and hospital leadership?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, biased, or disruptive behavior towards staff during investigations or audits; creates a negative impression of the Quality department through interactions (e.g., blaming, accusatory tone); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., insensitive during incident interviews, poor communication during reviews); occasionally represents the department poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and objective demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with staff involved in quality processes and colleagues; represents the department appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, and objective; has positive and constructive interactions with staff from all levels and departments, even in difficult situations (e.g., investigations); effectively addresses common quality/safety questions or concerns; represents the Quality department and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional, objective, and supportive behavior in promoting a safety culture; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and non-punitive attitude in all interactions related to quality and safety; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the Quality department and fosters trust hospital-wide.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the Quality department (e.g., joint investigations, sharing data insights, peer review of reports)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., clinical staff for RCAs/QI projects, risk management, medical staff leadership, IT) to gather information, implement changes, or improve quality/safety processes?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the Quality team; refuses to assist colleagues with investigations or data analysis; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments, causing significant delays and friction in QI/Safety efforts.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when investigating incidents, collecting data, or implementing changes.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine data collection, incident information, or implementation of basic QI initiatives.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports Quality team members (e.g., co-leads investigations, peer reviews reports effectively); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments during investigations, QI project meetings, and in addressing identified risks or non-compliance.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within the Quality department and across disciplines; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with clinical staff, leadership, and other support services; is an integral and valued part of the hospital's quality and safety structure, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that directly drives improvement and compliance.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the Quality team or between Quality and other hospital departments regarding investigation findings, proposed solutions, policy changes, data interpretation, or audit results?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with departments about root causes, blaming individuals); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally, particularly when findings are sensitive.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to investigation findings or proposed changes.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding quality findings or recommendations.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly discusses differing opinions on root causes with a committee, clarifies misunderstandings about policy changes with a department); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground for improvement.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to safety events, compliance failures, or data interpretations; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the team or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex QI/Safety issues effectively, fostering a culture of learning and improvement rather than blame.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their quality and safety knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members, and providing education to staff across the hospital on quality improvement methodologies, patient safety principles, incident reporting, or regulatory requirements?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; refuses to provide basic education to other departments.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining quality/safety concepts or procedures; avoids educational opportunities.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common procedures or quality/safety topics.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in quality/safety training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively; provides useful basic education to staff across the hospital upon request or proactively on relevant topics (e.g., how to submit a good incident report, basic QI concepts).

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training, coaching, and education on quality/safety topics; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new staff and colleagues; consistently provides impactful, high-quality presentations and training to staff at all levels (e.g., grand rounds, department meetings); develops effective educational materials; is recognized as a valuable educator and resource for fostering a hospital-wide safety culture.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., staying current with quality/safety literature/regulations, learning new methodologies/tools, attending conferences/webinars, pursuing certifications like CPHQ) to expand their knowledge and skills within the Quality field?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in staying current with quality/safety literature or regulations; avoids training or educational opportunities; resistant to expanding knowledge or skill set.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training/CE; does not seek out new knowledge independently regarding new methodologies or regulations.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new regulations, methodologies, or tools when required for their role; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks and CE.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their quality/safety knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (CE, literature review, workshops, certifications) to stay current with evidence, new methodologies, or emerging risks; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in Quality and Patient Safety; actively pursues CPHQ or other advanced certifications; consistently stays ahead of new research, regulations, and best practices; integrates new knowledge into practice and shares with the team and hospital; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and effectiveness.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively take steps to improve quality processes, data management, investigation efficiency, or regulatory readiness? In the face of a challenge (e.g., a complex incident, a data discrepancy, a potential compliance gap), does the person try to find solutions or resolve issues on their own initiative?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with quality processes or data; does not attempt troubleshooting incidents or compliance issues.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., reporting system issues, data inconsistencies) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help with complex incidents or compliance questions.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic quality issues or data discrepancies; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving quality processes, data integrity, investigation efficiency, or compliance tracking; demonstrates initiative in researching and resolving most complex quality/safety issues or data challenges independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, data accuracy, investigation timeliness, or regulatory readiness hospital-wide; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving system changes, workflow redesign, or new tools; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual quality/safety problems, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department and across the institution.

• E3: How often does he/ she come up with new ideas or suggest changes which can improve quality processes, patient safety, regulatory compliance, data analysis/reporting, or foster a stronger safety culture? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, safety, compliance, or process optimization within the department or across the hospital?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in Quality or Safety.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical or lack evidence basis; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving quality operations, safety reporting, or data processes; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving processes, safety protocols, or contributing to QI/Safety initiatives; actively contributes to departmental or hospital-wide initiatives (e.g., participation in a task force, helping pilot a new reporting feature, developing a new audit tool).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving quality operations, patient safety, regulatory compliance, or promoting a safety culture hospital-wide; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to implement a new safety checklist, developing a new audit program, optimizing data reporting systems); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's and institution's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., patient misidentification, critical scheduling errors, critical data entry errors, significant safety/privacy lapses). Significantly hinders workflow or patient/staff access to services.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures or system use. Makes common errors (e.g., inaccurate data entry, frequent scheduling conflicts, incomplete patient workup/vitals for MAs). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine administrative/clinical support tasks reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common issues and follows basic procedures. Contributes acceptably to workflow and data standards.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex processes, and requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on efficiency or patient service.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing administrative/clinical support processes, ensuring accuracy, and improving overall departmental efficiency and service.

Rephrased for these roles: Office/Administrative/Medical Assistant

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's knowledge and competencies relevant to their specific role (e.g., EMR/HIS use, scheduling systems, patient registration, medical terminology, basic billing/insurance concepts, phone/communication systems, office software proficiency, for MAs: vital signs, patient rooming, basic procedures, sterile technique)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic office procedures or software; requires constant step-by-step guidance for fundamental tasks (e.g., answering phone, scheduling, data entry, for MAs: taking vitals); frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational knowledge.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core administrative or clinical support concepts; requires frequent reminders and correction on procedures or system use; struggles with basic tasks or terminology (for MAs: performs vitals inconsistently); slow to learn new processes.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core competencies for routine tasks in their role; can perform standard procedures and use common systems with standard supervision; understands basic medical terminology and procedures; (for MAs: performs routine vital signs and patient rooming adequately).

  • 7-8: Possesses strong understanding of competencies; proficient in most procedures and systems for the role (including some complex functions like detailed scheduling, managing referrals, for MAs: assisting with minor procedures, basic venipuncture); understands the 'why' behind procedures; capable of teaching basic concepts or procedures to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's competencies; masters complex processes and systems; deep knowledge of relevant procedures, advanced system functionalities, and best practices; acts as a go-to resource for complex administrative/clinical support questions; proactively seeks to learn advanced skills or certifications.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their knowledge and skills in managing patient flow (check-in/out), scheduling appointments, handling communications (phone, email), managing records/data, assisting clinical staff, (for MAs: preparing patients, taking accurate vitals, assisting with procedures), and ensuring compliance with policies (e.g., privacy, safety)?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in scheduling, data entry, or communication resulting in inaccurate information, delayed workflow, or patient dissatisfaction; overlooks critical procedural steps or safety/privacy requirements; unable to perform basic tasks independently; significantly hinders workflow or service delivery.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application, resulting in frequent corrections or delays; requires frequent checks for accuracy in scheduling, data, or communication; struggles with adapting for difficult patient interactions or complex tasks (for MAs: performs inconsistent patient prep or vitals); needs significant help with troubleshooting issues.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine tasks accurately most of the time (scheduling, check-in/out, data entry, phone calls); follows basic procedural and compliance requirements consistently; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance; provides adequate support to clinical staff (for MAs: performs routine patient prep and vitals accurately most of the time).

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and efficiency in administrative/clinical support tasks; adept at handling complex scheduling or patient inquiries; proficient in troubleshooting moderately complex issues independently; maintains strong compliance practices; provides reliable support to clinical staff (for MAs: consistently performs accurate vitals, assists effectively with procedures, identifies patient needs proactively).

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior accuracy and efficiency; identifies potential issues before they impact workflow, data integrity, or compliance; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual administrative/clinical support problems; contributes to improving procedures or systems based on expertise; is a critical support for smooth clinical operations.

• 
  

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new software systems (EMR, scheduling), updated administrative procedures, new regulations (e.g., privacy updates), changes in clinical support protocols (for MAs: new vital sign parameters, updated rooming procedures), or changes in departmental workflow?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new procedures, systems, or regulations; refuses to use updated software or adopt new workflows (for MAs: resistant to new clinical support protocols); hinders implementation of changes in the department.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new methods or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new processes, technology, or clinical support tasks.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new procedures/systems/regulations/protocols at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new systems, procedures, or regulatory requirements (for MAs: new clinical support tasks); proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn and improve; actively seeks out training on new technologies or advanced tasks; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or protocols.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing specific administrative processes (e.g., scheduling block, supply inventory, phone queue), overseeing office functions, assisting with complex patient inquiries, training new staff on administrative/clinical support procedures, or participating in departmental administrative projects?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others; shows no interest in contributing to projects or training.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted; shows minimal engagement in extra duties or projects.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., covering a specific area, helping with a task); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with training or projects.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., managing a key process like referral tracking, effectively training a new staff member on check-in/out or vitals); volunteers for or actively participates in departmental administrative/clinical support initiatives.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or project leadership; demonstrates strong initiative in managing critical functions (e.g., optimizing supply management, improving scheduling efficiency), leading impactful projects, or mentoring other staff effectively; is a driving force for operational efficiency and team support.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency of accuracy and output in administrative/clinical support tasks (e.g., data entry, scheduling, vital signs, rooming) and meet deadlines, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to independently follow procedures for privacy, safety, accuracy, and task completion?

  • 1-2: Accuracy is highly inconsistent; frequently misses deadlines; cannot be trusted to perform basic tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (data entry, scheduling, privacy, for MAs: inaccurate vitals, incomplete patient prep).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally misses deadlines or requires reminders; needs frequent checks on accuracy in data entry, scheduling, or clinical support tasks; documentation is often incomplete.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent accuracy for routine tasks; generally meets deadlines; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard administrative/clinical support tasks and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Accuracy and output are consistently high; reliably meets deadlines for most tasks; can be trusted to handle most tasks independently from initiation to completion, including complex processes (for MAs: independently performs comprehensive patient workup); meticulous with privacy and accuracy checks.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers work of exceptional accuracy and efficiency; always meets or exceeds deadlines; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability, accuracy, and compliance in administrative/clinical support functions.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within their assigned authority (e.g., system access, handling sensitive data, for MAs: performing procedures within scope)? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors procedural errors, compliance issues (e.g., potential privacy breaches), system malfunctions, significant patient/staff complaints, critical changes in patient status (for MAs: unusual vital signs, patient distress), or any other significant issues promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly operates outside their defined scope or authority; fails to report major system issues, compliance breaches, significant complaints, or critical patient status changes; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor system glitches missed, minor patient complaints); may delay reporting significant issues like potential privacy breaches or concerning patient vital signs.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports major system malfunctions, compliance issues, significant complaints, and critical patient status changes (for MAs) as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of authority and, for MAs, clinical scope; reliably and promptly reports all required procedural errors, compliance issues (including near misses), system malfunctions, significant patient/staff complaints, and critical patient status changes (for MAs) to the appropriate supervisor and clinical staff; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for operational efficiency, risk management, and patient safety.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits and, for MAs, clinical scope; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle system errors, potential compliance concerns, process inefficiencies, challenging interactions, for MAs: subtle changes in patient condition), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in administrative/clinical operations and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• B4: Is the person committed to perform their best for the institution by effectively supporting departmental operations and clinical workflow and, when required, go beyond standard duties to assist colleagues with administrative/clinical workload, participate in departmental initiatives, or contribute positively to the department's and institution's reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to the department's success; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues with administrative/clinical workload or participate in any initiatives.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others with administrative/clinical tasks; avoids participation in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow and supports clinical staff; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to the department and institution; willingly supports colleagues with heavy administrative/clinical workload (e.g., helps during peak times, covers tasks, for MAs: assists with patient flow in rooms); actively participates in departmental initiatives like process improvements or patient satisfaction efforts; represents the department positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to enhancing departmental operations and supporting clinical workflow; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure team success and efficiency (e.g., staying late without being asked to complete urgent tasks, assisting with unexpected patient volume, for MAs: proactively anticipates physician/nurse needs); actively champions departmental initiatives; is a positive force for morale and productivity; significantly contributes to the department's and institution's reputation for administrative/clinical support excellence.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to adjust schedule for urgent administrative/clinical needs (e.g., covering reception, assisting with STAT patients, covering sick calls), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed for workload peaks or coverage?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling or responding to urgent administrative/clinical needs.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes or urgent needs; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs and urgent tasks.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for urgent administrative tasks, high patient volume, or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical administrative/clinical needs or emergencies; always available when needed.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and protocols for all tasks, including patient check-in/out, scheduling, data entry, communication, medical record management, and safety protocols (for MAs: patient workup, vital signs, assisting with procedures)? How well do they document actions, patient interactions related to admin/clinical support, and system notes according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., skips registration steps, fails to follow scheduling rules, for MAs: skips vital sign checks, fails to follow sterile technique); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major workflow, safety, or compliance risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs/protocols or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear (e.g., missing registration details, incomplete call notes, for MAs: incomplete vital signs); needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs/protocols correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard procedures (e.g., basic notes, call logs); complies with most requirements (for MAs: follows basic workup protocols correctly).

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs/protocols meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all tasks, including non-routine situations (e.g., complex inquiries, incident notes, for MAs: detailed patient notes, vital sign trends); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for efficiency, compliance, and communication.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs/protocols and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on challenging interactions, comprehensive system notes, for MAs: highly detailed patient notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs/protocols or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or compliance.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of administrative/clinical support work completion (e.g., patients checked in/out, appointments scheduled, calls handled, forms processed, for MAs: patients worked up, tasks completed) compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per task, causing significant delays in workflow and burdening the department.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of tasks for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable quality and accuracy.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high accuracy and quality; manages workload effectively and keeps workflow moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, accuracy, or compliance; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of their work (e.g., patient identification, demographics, scheduling details, financial/insurance info, data entry, form completion, handling cash/payments, for MAs: precise vital sign measurements, complete patient history, accurate medication reconciliation), which directly impacts patient experience, billing, workflow, data integrity, and patient care?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., patient misidentification, incorrect demographics/insurance, major scheduling errors, wrong data entry, for MAs: inaccurate vital signs, missing history); lacks attention to detail, leading to unreliable data, significant workflow issues, major compliance risks, and impacting clinical decision-making.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details during data entry, scheduling, or patient interaction (for MAs: minor vital sign inaccuracies, incomplete histories); attention to detail is inconsistent; work often requires correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard processes; work is generally accurate for common administrative/clinical support tasks; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in complex processes (e.g., complex scheduling, detailed financial info, for MAs: complex patient histories, accurate vital sign trends); high accuracy in patient identification, data entry, and form completion; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of their work; meticulously verifies every detail (patient info, dates, numbers, for MAs: vital sign precision, complete history); consistently produces perfect or near-perfect data; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., patients on forms, clinical staff in requests); is a champion for accuracy, quality, and compliance in administrative and clinical support functions.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional and helpful demeanor and positively represent the department and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may be stressed, confused, or in pain), visitors, colleagues within administration/clinical support, clinical staff, and medical providers?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients, visitors, or staff; creates a negative impression of the department/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with patients, arguing with clinical staff); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., brusque with patients, poor communication with other departments); occasionally represents the department poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and helpful demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, visitors, and other staff; provides standard customer service; represents the department appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/visitors, colleagues, clinical staff, and providers; effectively addresses common inquiries or concerns; represents the department and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and customer-service oriented behavior; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and supportive attitude in all interactions, particularly with stressed or difficult patients/families; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and clinical staff for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the department and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within the department (e.g., assisting with workload, sharing information, helping with coverage)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., clinical staff for scheduling/records/patient issues, billing/finance, IT) to coordinate patient care, clarify information, or improve workflows?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the administrative/clinical support team; refuses to assist colleagues with workload; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments (clinical, billing, etc.), causing significant delays and friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when administrative or patient issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports team members (e.g., helps with heavy workload, shares useful information); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (clinical staff, billing, etc.) to efficiently resolve administrative or patient care issues, clarify information, or improve integrated workflows.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within the department and across departments; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with clinical staff, other administrative teams, etc.; is an integral part of the hospital's operational flow, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures efficient patient care and departmental function.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise within the team or between the department's administrative/clinical support staff and clinical staff/other hospital departments regarding scheduling conflicts, patient issues, information requests, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with clinical staff about workflow, blaming others for errors); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive; can sometimes worsen conflict situations related to administrative/clinical support workflows or inter-departmental communication.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient flow or protocols.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly discusses scheduling issues with clinical staff, clarifies information requests respectfully with other departments); communicates effectively to de-escalate situations and find common ground.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to complex administrative, clinical support, or inter-departmental issues; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers within the team or with other departments; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex issues effectively, improving overall workflow and working relationships.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members or helping colleagues with complex administrative/clinical support tasks as needed?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; expresses frustration when asked for help.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common tasks (for MAs: training on basic workup/vitals).

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively on procedures and systems (for MAs: shares tips on difficult vital sign acquisition or patient interaction).

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or improving onboarding processes; is recognized as a valuable resource for skill development within the administrative/clinical support team.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., mastering new software features, learning updated administrative procedures/regulations, attending relevant workshops/webinars, pursuing certifications like CMA/RMA, CMPE) to expand their administrative/clinical support knowledge and skills?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new knowledge independently regarding new procedures, systems, or (for MAs: clinical support skills).

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new procedures, systems, or clinical support tasks when required for their role; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks and CE (for MAs).

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, pursuing certifications) to stay current with best practices, new systems, or regulations (for MAs: new clinical support techniques); learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development; actively pursues certifications or advanced training relevant to their role; consistently stays ahead of new techniques, systems, and regulations (for MAs: clinical best practices); shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and efficiency.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively take steps to improve administrative/clinical support processes, work efficiency, or patient service? In the face of a challenge (e.g., a system error, a complex patient request, workflow bottleneck), does the person try to find solutions or resolve issues on their own initiative?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with processes or systems; does not attempt troubleshooting administrative or clinical support issues.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., delays in check-in, scheduling issues) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help with administrative/clinical support issues or system errors.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for administrative/clinical support issues or system errors; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving workflows, efficiency, or service delivery (e.g., suggesting a better scheduling template, optimizing check-in steps, for MAs: suggesting a better rooming process); demonstrates initiative in troubleshooting most administrative/clinical support issues or system glitches independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, workflow, or service; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving system changes or process redesign; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual administrative/clinical support problems, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department.

• E3: How often does he/ she come up with new ideas or suggest changes which can improve administrative/clinical support processes, efficiency, patient experience, or support for clinical staff? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to quality, efficiency, technology adoption, or workflow optimization within the department?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving operations, efficiency, or patient experience; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflows, processes, patient interactions, or support for clinical staff; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a QI project, helping pilot a new system feature).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving operations, efficiency, patient satisfaction, or support for clinical teams; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to streamline check-in, optimizing scheduling, implementing a new patient communication tool); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards for customer service and assistance. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., giving completely wrong information/directions, displaying unprofessional behavior, neglecting safety concerns). Significantly harms patient/visitor experience or hinders workflow.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures, information, or communication. Makes common errors (e.g., unable to answer basic questions, provides unclear directions). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable in handling visitor needs.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine tasks and assist patients/visitors reliably with standard supervision. Provides accurate information for common inquiries and follows basic procedures. Contributes acceptably to maintaining a welcoming environment.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable in assisting a wide range of patients/visitors, including some with complex needs. Requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on enhancing patient/visitor experience.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others in customer service excellence. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in anticipating patient/visitor needs, resolving complex issues, and improving the overall OPD experience. Significantly contributes to fostering a positive and welcoming environment.

Rephrased for Guest Relation Staff (OPD):

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's knowledge of the hospital's layout, departments, services, common OPD procedures (e.g., check-in locations, payment processes, laboratory/radiology locations), and the information needed to effectively assist patients and visitors?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of the hospital/OPD structure; frequently gives incorrect directions or information; unable to answer basic questions about services or locations; requires constant guidance to find information.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping the hospital/OPD layout or common procedures; requires frequent reminders or has to look up even basic information; struggles to locate less common departments or services.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of the hospital/OPD layout and common procedures; can provide accurate directions and information for routine inquiries; knows where to find answers for less common questions.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong knowledge of the hospital/OPD structure, including less common services and clinics; proficient in guiding patients through complex flows; readily recalls information needed to assist most visitors efficiently; understands common clinical pathways relevant to guiding patients.

  • 9-10: Is an expert on the hospital's layout, services, and complex OPD processes; masters navigating challenging patient/visitor scenarios (e.g., multiple appointments, language barriers, special needs); acts as a go-to resource for difficult inquiries; proactively learns about new services or changes impacting visitors.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their knowledge to accurately answer questions, provide clear and empathetic directions, guide patients through OPD processes (e.g., directing to check-in points, testing areas), and find solutions for visitor needs?

  • 1-2: Frequently provides incorrect or confusing information/directions; unable to effectively guide patients; interactions are unhelpful or cause frustration for visitors.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in applying knowledge; directions/information may be unclear or incomplete; struggles to assist visitors with anything beyond basic needs; requires frequent correction.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge to answer routine questions accurately and provides clear directions most of the time; can guide patients through standard OPD steps; provides adequate assistance for common visitor needs.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and clarity; provides empathetic and easy-to-follow directions even for complex routes; effectively guides patients through various OPD processes; skilled at quickly finding solutions for a range of visitor needs.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge to provide consistently accurate, clear, and highly empathetic assistance; anticipates potential confusion points and proactively provides extra guidance; master of handling complex inquiries and finding creative solutions that exceed visitor expectations; significantly enhances the visitor journey.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new services/locations, updated procedures in OPD, technology changes (e.g., new wayfinding tools, self-service kiosks), or evolving visitor guidelines/policies?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning about changes; refuses to use new tools or follow updated procedures; provides outdated information, hindering operations.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new information or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new information/procedures/systems at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new guidelines once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn about new services, updates, or technology; proficient in new information/processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve service; actively seeks out information and training on all changes; helps others understand and adapt; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or service enhancements.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as assisting patients with complex inquiries, managing queues or waiting areas proactively, resolving minor issues without constant supervision, or supporting special patient/visitor events?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others or handle difficult situations; shows no interest in managing the environment or resolving issues.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted to manage queues or assist with non-routine inquiries; shows minimal engagement in extra duties.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., standing at a post, answering basic questions); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with managing flow or special events.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., proactively managing a busy waiting area, taking ownership of resolving a patient's navigation issue); volunteers for or actively participates in initiatives to improve visitor experience.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or leadership roles related to visitor experience; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex situations, leading by example in service excellence, or championing initiatives to enhance the welcoming environment; is a driving force for positive visitor interactions.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency in providing helpful service, maintaining a welcoming presence, and managing their assigned area (e.g., info desk, waiting area), even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to follow procedures for assisting patients and handling information independently?

  • 1-2: Service quality is highly inconsistent; frequently appears disengaged or unhelpful; assigned area is unmanaged; cannot be trusted to perform tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (giving wrong info).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally appears disengaged or struggles with tasks; requires frequent reminders on procedures; needs frequent checks on information accuracy.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent service quality for routine interactions; generally manages assigned area adequately; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard assistance and information provision with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Service quality and professionalism are consistently high; reliably manages assigned area proactively; can be trusted to handle most visitor needs independently, including complex inquiries; meticulous with providing accurate information.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers exceptional service quality and maintains a highly welcoming presence; always manages assigned area effectively, anticipating needs; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability and service excellence.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within the limits of information and assistance they are authorized to provide? Does the person bring to the notice of supervisors significant issues such as distressed/agitated patients, safety hazards, critical complaints, or complex inquiries requiring higher-level intervention promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly provides information/assistance outside their defined scope; fails to report severe issues (agitated patients, safety hazards, critical complaints); actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority (e.g., attempting to provide clinical info); reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor complaints missed); may delay reporting significant issues.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports major safety hazards, agitated individuals, and critical complaints as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of authority; reliably and promptly reports all required critical issues (agitated individuals, safety hazards, significant complaints, complex inquiries) to the appropriate supervisor or staff (e.g., security, clinical staff); understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for safety and service.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle signs of distress, potential safety concerns, ethical dilemmas in visitor interactions), even minor ones that could escalate; acts as a key safeguard in the visitor experience and contributes to improving reporting systems.

• B4: Is the person committed to providing the best possible experience for patients and visitors and go beyond the call of duty when required to support their team, the department's service goals, and the institution's reputation?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to visitor experience; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues or assist visitors beyond the basics.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or department goals; rarely helps others with workload or difficult visitors; avoids participation in departmental initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to enhancing visitor experience; willingly supports colleagues with heavy workload or challenging visitors; actively participates in departmental initiatives like service improvement tasks; represents the department positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to providing exceptional visitor experience; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure every interaction is positive (e.g., personally walks a confused visitor, anticipates needs); actively champions departmental initiatives related to service excellence; is a positive force for morale and visitor satisfaction; significantly contributes to the department's and institution's reputation for compassionate care and service.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts (e.g., covering lunches, swapping shifts), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed due to high visitor volume or staffing issues?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for high visitor volume or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical periods to ensure continuous service for visitors.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) for all tasks, including greeting visitors, providing information, managing queues, handling basic requests, and using relevant systems/resources? How well do they document interactions or actions taken according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs (e.g., fails to greet visitors, uses incorrect resources, mismanages queues); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major workflow or service risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs or forgets steps; documentation is often incomplete or unclear; needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard interactions (e.g., basic log entries); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all interactions, including non-routine situations (e.g., complex inquiries, incident notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for service quality and consistency.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on complex interactions, comprehensive system notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or service enhancement.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of assisting patients/visitors and handling inquiries, compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality service and empathy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low; requires excessive time per visitor interaction, causing significant delays in the lobby/waiting areas.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to assist visitors, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising service quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently assists an expected volume of visitors/inquiries for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable service quality and empathy.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality service and empathy; manages visitor flow effectively.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, empathy, or accuracy; streamlines own work process and helps optimize flow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and visitor experience.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of Guest Relation work (e.g., verifying information requested, selecting correct resources, relaying accurate directions, logging interactions), which directly impacts visitor experience and workflow?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., giving wrong information, pointing to the wrong location, mixing up patient/visitor details); lacks attention to detail, leading to frustrated visitors and significant workflow issues.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details (e.g., incomplete directions, forgetting to log an interaction); attention to detail is inconsistent; interactions sometimes require correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard interactions; information provided is generally accurate for common inquiries; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in verifying information and providing precise directions; high accuracy in data entry/logging interactions; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of Guest Relation work; meticulously verifies information and provides consistently accurate and clear details; identifies potential errors made by others (e.g., in scheduling information); is a champion for accuracy and quality service.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the Guest Relation service and the hospital when interacting with patients/families (who may be anxious, confused, or frustrated), visitors, colleagues within Guest Relations, and staff from other departments?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards visitors or staff; creates a negative impression of the service/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with confused visitors, arguing with colleagues); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards visitor concerns, poor communication with other departments); occasionally represents the service poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with visitors and other staff; provides standard customer service; represents the service appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic, and helpful; has positive interactions with visitors, colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common inquiries or concerns; represents the service and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and compassionate service; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and calming attitude in all interactions, particularly with anxious or difficult visitors; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach; significantly enhances the image and reputation of the Guest Relation service and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within Guest Relations (e.g., assisting with queues, sharing information, helping with coverage)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., scheduling, clinical staff, security, transport) to facilitate patient/visitor flow, resolve issues, and ensure a positive experience?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the Guest Relation team; refuses to assist colleagues with visitor flow or issues; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments, causing significant delays and friction.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when patient/visitor flow or information issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports Guest Relation team members (e.g., helps manage busy periods, shares information effectively); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (e.g., scheduling, clinical staff) to efficiently resolve patient/visitor issues, clarify information, or improve integrated workflows.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within Guest Relations and across departments; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with clinical staff, security, transport, etc.; is an integral part of the hospital's operational flow, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures efficient patient/visitor flow and a positive experience.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise with upset or frustrated patients/visitors, or between Guest Relations and other departments regarding patient/visitor issues, scheduling conflicts, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with upset visitors, blaming other departments); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive when faced with frustrated visitors or challenging inter-departmental issues; can sometimes worsen conflict situations.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding visitor concerns or workflow.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly de-escalates a frustrated visitor, discusses differing procedures respectfully with another department); communicates effectively to find common ground for service improvement.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to visitor complaints or inter-departmental issues; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex visitor/workflow issues effectively, significantly improving satisfaction and team dynamics.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members on customer service best practices, common inquiries, hospital layout, or using resources effectively?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; expresses frustration when asked for help.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures or information.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common tasks and information.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively on procedures, resources, and common visitor needs.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or improving onboarding processes; is recognized as a valuable resource for skill development and service excellence within the Guest Relation team.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., learning about new services/departments, mastering new information systems/technology, attending customer service workshops, professional development) to expand their knowledge and skills relevant to assisting patients and visitors?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new information independently regarding hospital services or systems.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new services, procedures, or systems when required for their role; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, learning new systems) to stay current with information and improve service; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in customer service and hospital knowledge; actively seeks out training on advanced topics (de-escalation, specific needs); consistently stays ahead of new information and best practices; shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and service quality.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively take steps to improve Guest Relation processes, efficiency in assisting visitors, or service delivery? In the face of a challenge (e.g., a confusing sign, a recurring question, a workflow bottleneck), does the person try to find solutions or resolve issues on their own initiative?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with processes or visitor experience; does not attempt troubleshooting.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., long queues, confused visitors) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic visitor issues or workflow challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving workflows, efficiency, or service delivery (e.g., suggesting a better way to manage queues, optimizing information delivery); demonstrates initiative in resolving most visitor issues or workflow challenges independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving departmental efficiency, visitor flow, or service; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving workflow changes or suggesting new tools/signage; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual visitor problems or system issues, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent in the department.

• E3: How often does he/ she come up with new ideas or suggest changes which can improve Guest Relation services, patient/visitor experience, workflow, or communication? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to service quality, efficiency, or visitor satisfaction?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in Guest Relations.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving operations or visitor experience; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflows, processes, or visitor interactions; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a service quality project, helping pilot a new communication method).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving operations, visitor experience, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to improve signage, optimizing the lobby layout, implementing a new feedback collection method); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable standards for patient care support and service. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., neglecting patient comfort needs, failing to escalate significant observations, unprofessional behavior). Significantly harms patient experience or hinders ward operations.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on procedures, communication, or service delivery. Misses common patient comfort/service needs. Progress is slow even with support. Reliability is questionable in handling patient requests or following protocols.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine patient support tasks and assist patients/families reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common patient comfort/service needs and follows basic procedures and communication protocols. Contributes acceptably to maintaining a positive patient environment.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific areas. Highly reliable in assisting a wide range of patients/families, including some with complex needs or higher expectations. Requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on enhancing patient comfort and service.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others in patient service excellence and empathetic care. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in anticipating patient needs, resolving complex issues, and improving the overall private ward experience. Significantly contributes to fostering a positive, comfortable, and caring environment.

Rephrased for IPD Private Ward Patient Support Staff:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's knowledge of the hospital's IPD Private Ward services, amenities, policies (e.g., visiting hours, meal service times, access to resources), communication systems (e.g., call bells, service request systems), and the information needed to effectively support patients and families?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of ward services or policies; frequently gives incorrect information; unable to answer basic questions about amenities or procedures; requires constant guidance to find information.

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping ward services, amenities, or policies; requires frequent reminders or has to look up even common information; struggles to use service request systems effectively.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of the ward's services, amenities, and common policies; can provide accurate information for routine inquiries; knows where to find answers for less common questions.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong knowledge of the ward's services, complex amenities, and policies; proficient in guiding patients/families through service options; readily recalls information needed to assist most patients/families efficiently; understands the flow of services (e.g., meal ordering, transport requests).

  • 9-10: Is an expert on the private ward's services, amenities, and intricate processes; masters handling challenging patient/family scenarios related to service expectations; acts as a go-to resource for difficult service inquiries; proactively learns about new service offerings or changes impacting patients/families.

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their knowledge and skills to accurately answer questions, fulfill patient/family requests (within scope), anticipate comfort needs, use communication/service systems effectively, and find solutions for non-clinical patient/family needs?

  • 1-2: Frequently provides incorrect information or fails to fulfill requests; unable to effectively use service systems; overlooks basic comfort needs; interactions are unhelpful or cause frustration for patients/families.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in applying knowledge; information or service is unclear or incomplete; struggles to assist patients/families with anything beyond basic needs; requires frequent correction in handling requests.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge to answer routine questions accurately and fulfill standard requests most of the time; can use service systems for common tasks; provides adequate assistance for common patient/family needs; addresses basic comfort needs.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and clarity in communication; provides empathetic and effective assistance for a range of requests; skilled at quickly finding solutions for non-clinical patient/family needs; proactively addresses comfort needs.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge to provide consistently accurate, clear, and highly empathetic service; anticipates potential comfort or service needs and proactively addresses them; master of handling complex requests and finding creative solutions that exceed patient/family expectations; significantly enhances the patient experience.

• 
  

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new service offerings/amenities, updated policies on the ward, technology changes (e.g., new service request app, updated communication system), or evolving patient service standards?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning about changes; refuses to use new systems or follow updated procedures; provides outdated information, hindering operations and service delivery.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new information or systems; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new information/procedures/systems at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new standards once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn about new services, updates, or technology; proficient in new information/processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to improve service; actively seeks out information and training on all changes; helps others understand and adapt; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or service enhancements.

Category: Accountability & Dependability

• B1: Does the person show enthusiasm and readiness to take on responsibility readily, such as managing assigned patient rooms/areas, ensuring patient comfort rounds are completed, proactively assisting with meal service coordination, resolving minor service issues without constant supervision, or supporting special patient comfort/service initiatives?

  • 1-2: Consistently avoids taking on any responsibility beyond basic assigned tasks; refuses to help others or handle difficult patient/family situations; shows no interest in managing their assigned area or resolving issues.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly takes on responsibility only when directly assigned; needs to be heavily prompted to complete rounds or assist with non-routine requests; shows minimal engagement in extra duties.

  • 5-6: Takes on assigned responsibilities willingly (e.g., managing assigned rooms, completing scheduled rounds); completes tasks reliably; participates adequately when asked to help with managing service delivery or special initiatives.

  • 7-8: Shows enthusiasm for taking on additional responsibilities (e.g., proactively managing a section of rooms, taking ownership of resolving a patient's service issue); volunteers for or actively participates in initiatives to improve patient comfort and experience.

  • 9-10: Actively seeks out opportunities to take on significant responsibility or leadership roles related to patient service; demonstrates strong initiative in managing complex service situations, leading by example in service excellence, or championing initiatives to enhance the private ward environment and patient satisfaction; is a driving force for positive patient interactions.

• B2: Does he/she maintain consistency in providing high-quality service, ensuring patient comfort, and managing their assigned area, even without direct supervision? Can they be trusted to follow procedures for patient rounding, service delivery, and documentation independently?

  • 1-2: Service quality is highly inconsistent; frequently appears disengaged or fails to follow through on requests; assigned area is unmanaged; cannot be trusted to perform tasks without constant checking and reminders; makes frequent critical errors (failing to follow up on urgent service requests).

  • 3-4: Work is inconsistent; occasionally appears disengaged or struggles with tasks; requires frequent reminders on procedures (e.g., rounding frequency); needs frequent checks on service delivery accuracy.

  • 5-6: Maintains consistent service quality for routine interactions; generally manages assigned area adequately; can be trusted to follow procedures for standard patient rounding, service delivery, and documentation with minimal oversight.

  • 7-8: Service quality and professionalism are consistently high; reliably manages assigned area proactively; can be trusted to handle most patient needs independently, including complex requests; meticulous with following up on requests and ensuring patient comfort.

  • 9-10: Consistently delivers exceptional service quality and maintains a highly welcoming and comfortable presence; always manages assigned area effectively, anticipating needs; is highly reliable and requires virtually no checking for all aspects of their work; acts as a benchmark for dependability and service excellence.

• B3: Can the person be trusted to stay within the limits of information and assistance they are authorized to provide (focusing on non-clinical support)? Does the person bring to the notice of nursing staff or supervisors critical patient observations (e.g., change in alertness, signs of pain, distress), significant service failures, safety hazards in the room, critical complaints, or complex inquiries requiring clinical/higher-level intervention promptly?

  • 1-2: Regularly provides information/assistance outside their defined scope (e.g., attempting to provide clinical info, advise on medication); fails to report severe patient observations (distress, pain), safety hazards, or critical complaints; actively hides errors or problems.

  • 3-4: Occasionally exceeds authority; reports some but not all required incidents (e.g., minor service issues missed); may delay reporting significant issues like patient distress or critical complaints.

  • 5-6: Generally operates within assigned authority; reports major safety hazards, obvious changes in patient status requiring nursing attention, and critical complaints as required; follows reporting procedures most of the time.

  • 7-8: Consistently operates strictly within scope of authority; reliably and promptly reports all required critical patient observations (subtle changes in status, signs of discomfort), safety hazards, significant complaints, and complex inquiries to the appropriate nursing staff or supervisor; understands the importance of accurate and timely communication for patient safety and effective care.

  • 9-10: Has an exceptional understanding of their authority limits and the boundary between service and clinical care; is highly proactive in identifying and immediately reporting any potential issue (subtle signs of distress, potential safety concerns, service failures affecting patient well-being), even minor ones that could escalate or require clinical assessment; acts as a key safeguard in patient comfort and contributes to improving reporting systems for service and safety concerns.

• B4: Is the person committed to providing the best possible experience for private ward patients and families and go beyond the call of duty when required to support their team, the ward's service goals, and the institution's reputation for premium care?

  • 1-2: Shows no commitment to patient experience; only does the absolute minimum required; refuses to help colleagues or assist patients/families beyond the basics.

  • 3-4: Completes assigned duties but shows little interest in the team or ward goals; rarely helps others with workload or difficult patients/families; avoids participation in departmental initiatives.

  • 5-6: Diligently performs assigned duties; is a reliable team member; contributes positively to daily workflow; participates adequately in initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Shows strong commitment to enhancing patient/family experience; willingly supports colleagues with heavy workload or challenging interactions; actively participates in ward initiatives like patient satisfaction tasks or service improvement projects; represents the ward positively.

  • 9-10: Is highly dedicated to providing exceptional patient/family experience in the private ward; consistently goes above and beyond standard duties to ensure every interaction is positive and comfort needs are met (e.g., anticipates needs, spends extra time providing comfort items); actively champions ward initiatives related to service excellence; is a positive force for morale and patient/family satisfaction; significantly contributes to the ward's and institution's reputation for compassionate and premium care.

Category: Availability, Effort, Work Output

• C1: How would you rate the individual's attendance and timeliness, including reporting on time for shifts, consistency in avoiding unnecessary absenteeism, flexibility to work different shifts (e.g., covering lunches, swapping shifts), and willingness to put in extra time when urgently needed due to high patient volume or staffing issues?

  • 1-2: Frequent unexplained absences or tardiness; highly unreliable for shift coverage; completely inflexible with scheduling.

  • 3-4: Occasional issues with attendance or punctuality; sometimes difficult regarding scheduling changes; reluctant to stay extra time to help with workload.

  • 5-6: Meets standard attendance and punctuality requirements; is reasonably reliable for scheduled shifts; demonstrates some flexibility for coverage needs.

  • 7-8: Excellent attendance and punctuality; highly reliable for all scheduled shifts; willingly flexible with scheduling changes and readily available/works extra time when needed for high patient volume or staffing issues.

  • 9-10: Perfect or near-perfect attendance and punctuality; exceptionally reliable for shift coverage; highly proactive in helping cover shifts or working extra time during critical periods to ensure continuous service for patients.

• C2: Does he/she consistently and accurately follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) and protocols for all tasks, including patient rounds, documenting comfort needs/requests, coordinating service deliveries (e.g., meals), maintaining the patient environment, and using service request systems? How well do they document interactions or actions taken according to departmental standards?

  • 1-2: Consistently ignores or deviates significantly from SOPs/protocols (e.g., skips patient rounds, fails to use service request system correctly, neglects patient environment); documentation is often missing, inaccurate, or illegible; creates major service or workflow risks due to poor adherence.

  • 3-4: Frequently deviates from SOPs or forgets steps (e.g., incomplete rounds, forgetting to document a request); documentation is often incomplete or unclear; needs frequent reminders about procedures and documentation requirements.

  • 5-6: Generally follows SOPs correctly for routine tasks; documentation is adequate for standard interactions (e.g., basic log entries, documenting fulfilled requests); complies with most requirements.

  • 7-8: Consistently follows all relevant SOPs meticulously; documentation is accurate, complete, clear, and timely for all interactions, including non-routine situations (e.g., complex requests, incident notes); understands the importance of SOPs and documentation for service quality and consistency.

  • 9-10: Adheres strictly to all SOPs and often exceeds documentation standards (e.g., provides exceptional detail on challenging requests, comprehensive system notes); documentation is exemplary and could serve as a training example; proactively identifies potential issues with existing SOPs or documentation processes and suggests improvements for clarity, consistency, or service enhancement.

• C3: How would you rate the individual's efficiency in terms of speed and volume of assisting patients/families, completing rounds, handling requests, and coordinating services, compared to other team members with similar roles and experience, while consistently maintaining high quality service and empathy?

  • 1-2: Works significantly slower than peers; output volume is very low (e.g., few rounds completed, slow response to requests); requires excessive time per task, causing significant delays in service delivery.

  • 3-4: Slower than most peers; output volume is below average; takes longer than expected to complete tasks, occasionally impacting workflow, sometimes compromising service quality for speed.

  • 5-6: Works at an average pace comparable to peers; consistently completes an expected volume of tasks (rounds, requests handled) for their role; completes tasks within standard timeframes while maintaining acceptable service quality and empathy.

  • 7-8: Works efficiently and quickly; output volume is above average compared to peers, while consistently maintaining high quality service and empathy; manages workload effectively and keeps processes moving smoothly.

  • 9-10: Is exceptionally efficient; output volume is consistently high and sets a benchmark for the team, without ever compromising quality, empathy, or accuracy; streamlines own work process and helps optimize workflow for others; is a high-productivity team member who significantly enhances overall departmental throughput and patient service.

• C4: How would you rate the individual in terms of attention to detail and accuracy in all aspects of their work (e.g., verifying patient identity for service delivery, confirming understanding of requests, ensuring correct amenity delivery, accurate documentation of requests/actions), which directly impacts patient experience and service quality?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes critical errors (e.g., delivering wrong items to wrong patient, misunderstanding crucial requests, missing important details from interactions); lacks attention to detail, leading to frustrated patients/families and significant service issues.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional significant errors or overlooks important details (e.g., incomplete request details, forgetting to document an action); attention to detail is inconsistent; interactions sometimes require correction or follow-up by others due to accuracy issues.

  • 5-6: Makes few errors in routine tasks; shows reasonable attention to detail in standard interactions and requests; information relayed and actions taken are generally accurate for common inquiries; performs required checks adequately.

  • 7-8: Makes rare errors; demonstrates strong attention to detail in verifying requests, confirming patient identity for service, and documenting details; high accuracy in fulfilling requests and relaying information; validates own work effectively; catches potential minor issues.

  • 9-10: Virtually error-free work output; possesses exceptional attention to detail in all aspects of patient support work; meticulously verifies information and ensures consistently accurate and complete service delivery; identifies potential issues made by others (e.g., in a service request); is a champion for accuracy and quality service, ensuring patient needs are met precisely.

Category: Interpersonal Relationships, Teamwork & Collaboration

• D1: Does the person consistently maintain a professional, empathetic, and positive demeanor and positively represent the Patient Care Services and the hospital when interacting with private ward patients/families (who may have high expectations, be anxious, or have complex needs), colleagues within Patient Care Services, and staff from other departments (nursing, medical providers, dietary, housekeeping)?

  • 1-2: Displays unprofessional, rude, or disruptive behavior towards patients/families or staff; creates a negative impression of the service/hospital through interactions (e.g., impatience with demanding patients, arguing with colleagues); shows disrespect.

  • 3-4: Sometimes unprofessional or has a negative attitude; interactions can be difficult or unhelpful (e.g., dismissive towards patient/family concerns, poor communication with nursing regarding a request); occasionally represents the service poorly.

  • 5-6: Maintains a professional and empathetic demeanor most of the time; interacts acceptably with patients, families, and other staff; provides standard customer service; represents the service appropriately in routine interactions.

  • 7-8: Consistently professional, courteous, empathetic, and helpful; has positive interactions with patients/families (even those with high expectations), colleagues, and staff from other departments; effectively addresses common inquiries or concerns; represents the service and hospital well.

  • 9-10: Acts as a role model for professional and compassionate service; consistently maintains a positive, helpful, and supportive attitude in all interactions, particularly with challenging patients/families; is highly respected and sought out by colleagues and other departments for their collaborative approach and ability to enhance the patient experience; significantly enhances the image and reputation of Patient Care Services and the hospital.

• D2: Does he/ she effectively cooperate and collaborate with team members within Patient Care Services (e.g., assisting with workload, sharing information, helping with coverage)? Do they actively and constructively interact with staff from other hospital departments (e.g., nursing staff regarding patient status/needs, dietary for meals, housekeeping for environment, transport) to facilitate service delivery, resolve patient issues, and ensure a positive experience?

  • 1-2: Uncooperative within the Patient Care Services team; refuses to assist colleagues with workload or patient needs; avoids or actively hinders interactions with other departments (nursing, dietary, etc.), causing significant delays and friction in meeting patient needs.

  • 3-4: Reluctant to collaborate; provides minimal assistance to colleagues; interacts poorly or unhelpfully with other departments when patient service or comfort issues arise.

  • 5-6: Cooperates with team members when needed; provides basic assistance; interacts adequately with other departments for routine coordination or issue resolution.

  • 7-8: Actively collaborates and supports Patient Care Services team members (e.g., helps manage busy periods, shares information effectively); engages constructively and effectively with staff from other departments (e.g., nursing to relay non-clinical needs, dietary for meal coordination) to efficiently resolve patient comfort or service issues.

  • 9-10: Champions teamwork and collaboration both within Patient Care Services and across departments; proactively assists colleagues and builds strong, trusting relationships with nursing, dietary, housekeeping, etc.; is an integral part of the patient care team, facilitating smooth communication and joint problem-solving that ensures efficient and high-quality service delivery and enhances the patient experience.

• D3: Does the person constructively engage in resolving disagreements or communication challenges that may arise with upset or frustrated patients/families regarding service issues, or between Patient Care Services and other departments regarding service delivery, patient requests, or procedural disagreements?

  • 1-2: Avoids conflict or actively escalates it (e.g., arguing with upset patients/families, blaming other departments); contributes negatively to tense situations; unable to handle disagreements professionally.

  • 3-4: Struggles to handle disagreements; may withdraw or become defensive when faced with frustrated patients/families or challenging inter-departmental issues; can sometimes worsen conflict situations.

  • 5-6: Handles basic disagreements appropriately; doesn't escalate conflicts unnecessarily; participates passively in resolving communication issues regarding patient/family concerns or service delivery.

  • 7-8: Attempts to resolve conflicts constructively (e.g., calmly de-escalates a frustrated patient/family member regarding a service issue, discusses differing procedures respectfully with another department); communicates effectively to find common ground for service improvement.

  • 9-10: Is highly skilled in navigating difficult conversations related to patient/family complaints or inter-departmental issues; proactively addresses potential sources of conflict or communication barriers; acts as a mediator or facilitator to resolve complex service/patient issues effectively, significantly improving satisfaction and team dynamics.

• D4: Is he/she willing and eager to share their knowledge and expertise, guiding, training, or coaching less experienced team members on service protocols, patient communication best practices, using service systems, or handling common requests effectively?

  • 1-2: Unwilling to help or train others; withholds knowledge or makes it difficult for new staff to learn; expresses frustration when asked for help.

  • 3-4: Reluctantly provides minimal assistance or training when directly asked; lacks patience or clarity in explaining procedures or service standards.

  • 5-6: Is willing to train or guide others when assigned or asked directly; provides adequate basic instruction on common tasks and service procedures.

  • 7-8: Shows willingness and interest in training and mentoring; patiently guides less experienced colleagues; shares knowledge freely and effectively on procedures, service standards, and patient communication techniques.

  • 9-10: Is highly eager and skilled in training and coaching; actively seeks opportunities to mentor new or less experienced staff; contributes to developing training materials or improving onboarding processes for service excellence; is recognized as a valuable resource for skill development and service quality within the Patient Care Services team.

Category: New Learning & Innovation

• E1: Does the individual show eagerness and actively pursue learning opportunities (e.g., learning about new services/amenities, mastering new communication/service systems, attending customer service workshops, professional development in hospitality/healthcare service) to expand their knowledge and skills relevant to patient support and service excellence?

  • 1-2: Shows no interest in learning new skills or expanding knowledge; avoids training opportunities; resistant to personal or professional development in service provision.

  • 3-4: Shows minimal interest in learning; participates only in mandatory training; does not seek out new information independently regarding service offerings or systems.

  • 5-6: Is willing to learn about new services, procedures, or systems when required for their role; attends assigned training; completes necessary learning tasks.

  • 7-8: Shows genuine interest in expanding their knowledge and skills; actively seeks out learning opportunities (workshops, self-study, learning new systems) to stay current with information and improve service; learns new tasks or responsibilities readily.

  • 9-10: Is highly passionate about continuous professional development in patient service and hospitality; actively seeks out training on advanced topics (e.g., de-escalation, handling VIPs, anticipating needs); consistently stays ahead of new information and best practices; shares learnings with the team; significantly contributes to the department's overall expertise and service quality.

• E2: Does he/ she proactively take steps to improve service processes, efficiency in assisting patients/families, or service delivery on the ward? In the face of a challenge (e.g., a confusing policy, a recurring request type, a workflow bottleneck), does the person try to find solutions or resolve issues on their own initiative?

  • 1-2: Shows no initiative; waits to be told what to do; ignores problems with processes or patient experience; does not attempt troubleshooting service issues.

  • 3-4: Rarely shows initiative; identifies problems (e.g., delays in service, recurring patient questions) but doesn't attempt solutions; performs minimal troubleshooting steps before asking for help.

  • 5-6: Identifies common problems or areas for basic improvement when pointed out; attempts standard troubleshooting steps for basic service issues or workflow challenges; participates in minor process improvement efforts.

  • 7-8: Proactively identifies opportunities for improving workflows, efficiency, or service delivery (e.g., suggesting a better way to communicate meal options, optimizing amenity delivery); demonstrates initiative in resolving most service issues or workflow challenges independently; suggests practical solutions.

  • 9-10: Consistently identifies significant opportunities for improving ward efficiency, patient comfort, or service delivery; takes initiative to implement improvements (with approval), potentially involving workflow changes or suggesting new approaches to service provision; is highly skilled and proactive in troubleshooting complex or unusual patient/service problems, often resolving them independently; acts as a key problem-solver and change agent on the ward.

• E3: How often does he/ she come up with new ideas or suggest changes which can improve Patient Care Services, patient/family experience, workflow, or communication on the private ward? Do they actively participate in or champion new initiatives related to service quality, efficiency, or patient/family satisfaction?

  • 1-2: Never offers suggestions for improvement; resistant to new ideas or initiatives in Patient Care Services.

  • 3-4: Rarely offers suggestions, and ideas may be impractical; shows no interest in initiatives.

  • 5-6: Offers occasional relevant suggestions for improving operations or patient/family experience; participates adequately in team initiatives when asked.

  • 7-8: Regularly offers practical and relevant suggestions for improving workflows, processes, or patient/family interactions; actively contributes to departmental initiatives (e.g., participation in a service quality project, helping pilot a new service offering).

  • 9-10: Frequently proposes innovative and impactful ideas for improving operations, patient/family experience, or service delivery; actively champions and drives implementation of new initiatives (e.g., leading a project to improve amenity distribution, optimizing patient rounding scripts, implementing a new feedback collection method); is recognized as a valuable contributor to the department's continuous improvement and innovation efforts.

Okay, let's create questions and a 1-10 quantitative/semi-quantitative grading scale specifically for IT Technical Staff roles within a healthcare setting. This includes roles like Help Desk Support, Desktop Support, Network Technicians, System Administrators, Application Support Analysts (especially for clinical systems), focusing on their technical expertise, problem-solving, support for users (clinical and administrative), and maintenance of critical systems.

We will use the same 1-10 scale framework as before, adapting the descriptors to the IT Technical Staff context:

Grading Scale (1-10):

• 1-2: Unsatisfactory / Needs Significant Improvement: Performance is consistently below minimum acceptable technical standards. Requires constant supervision and intervention. Frequent major errors (e.g., causing system downtime, significant security lapses, failing to resolve critical issues). Significantly hinders clinical/administrative workflow or patient care.

• 3-4: Needs Improvement: Performance is inconsistent and often falls below expectations. Requires frequent guidance and correction on technical tasks or troubleshooting. Makes common errors (e.g., inability to fix common issues, slow resolution time). Progress is slow even with support. Reliability in technical tasks is questionable.

• 5-6: Meets Expectations / Solid Performance: Performance is generally consistent and meets the requirements of the role. Can perform routine technical tasks and resolve standard issues reliably with standard supervision. Identifies common technical problems and follows basic procedures (troubleshooting, documentation, security). Contributes acceptably to system stability and user support.

• 7-8: Exceeds Expectations in Areas / Strong Performance: Performance often exceeds expectations in specific technical areas. Highly reliable for most tasks, including some complex troubleshooting or system maintenance. Requires minimal routine supervision. Proactive in identifying and addressing technical issues or seeking improvements sometimes. Provides valuable input on technical solutions.

• 9-10: Consistently Exceeds Expectations / Exceptional Performance: Performance consistently surpasses expectations across all aspects of the role. Acts as a role model and resource for others in technical expertise and problem-solving. Highly proactive, takes significant initiative in optimizing systems, resolving complex/critical issues, and enhancing security. Consistently delivers high-quality technical support and solutions.

Now, applying this framework to each question, rephrased for IT Technical Staff:

Category: Knowledge & Skills

• A1: How would you rate the individual's technical knowledge and competencies relevant to their specific role/area (e.g., hardware/software support, networking concepts, operating systems, server administration, database basics, security principles, knowledge of critical healthcare applications like EMR, PACS, lab systems)?

  • 1-2: Has very limited knowledge of basic IT concepts or systems; unable to perform fundamental technical tasks (e.g., installing software, basic troubleshooting); frequently makes critical errors due to lack of foundational knowledge (e.g., impacting system stability, security risks).

  • 3-4: Has difficulty grasping core technical concepts; requires frequent reminders and correction on procedures or system configurations; struggles with basic troubleshooting or understanding critical applications; slow to learn new technologies.

  • 5-6: Demonstrates adequate understanding of core technical competencies for routine tasks in their area; can perform standard installations, configurations, and troubleshooting with standard supervision; understands basic system architecture and security principles relevant to their role.

  • 7-8: Possesses strong technical knowledge covering a broad range of common and some complex systems/applications; proficient in advanced troubleshooting and configuration; understands the 'why' behind technical decisions (e.g., network protocols, security best practices); capable of teaching basic concepts or procedures to others.

  • 9-10: Is an expert in their area's technical competencies; masters complex system configurations, troubleshooting, and specialized healthcare applications; deep knowledge of IT infrastructure and security; acts as a go-to resource for complex technical questions and critical issues; proactively seeks to learn advanced technologies and certifications

• A2: How effectively does the individual apply their technical knowledge and skills in resolving support tickets, performing system maintenance, troubleshooting hardware/software/network issues, implementing configurations, maintaining security, and supporting users of healthcare systems efficiently and accurately?

  • 1-2: Frequently makes errors in troubleshooting or configuration resulting in unrepaired or worsening issues; unable to resolve common technical problems; overlooks critical security or system stability issues; significantly hinders user productivity.

  • 3-4: Makes occasional errors in application, resulting in frequent call backs or unresolved issues; requires frequent checks for accuracy in configurations or troubleshooting steps; struggles with complex technical problems; needs significant help with supporting critical applications.

  • 5-6: Applies knowledge and skills to perform routine support and maintenance tasks accurately most of the time; resolves standard issues effectively; follows basic security protocols consistently; can perform simple troubleshooting steps with guidance; provides adequate support for common user issues.

  • 7-8: Consistently applies knowledge for high accuracy and efficiency in technical tasks; adept at troubleshooting moderately complex hardware, software, or network issues independently; proficient in implementing configurations and maintaining security; provides strong support for key healthcare applications.

  • 9-10: Demonstrates exceptional skill in applying knowledge for superior accuracy and efficiency; identifies potential technical issues or security risks before they impact systems or users; highly proficient in troubleshooting complex and unusual problems across multiple systems; contributes to improving technical standards or implementing security measures based on expertise.

• A3: Is he/she willing and able to quickly adapt to changes, including new software/hardware, operating system updates, changes in network infrastructure, security patch procedures, new healthcare application versions, or evolving IT policies/workflows?

  • 1-2: Actively resists learning new technologies, systems, or procedures; refuses to use updated software/hardware or adopt new workflows; hinders implementation of changes in the IT environment.

  • 3-4: Shows reluctance towards change; takes a long time to become proficient in new systems or technologies; requires excessive support and reminders during transitions to new software, hardware, or workflows.

  • 5-6: Accepts change and learns new technologies/procedures/systems at a reasonable pace; becomes competent after standard training; follows new policies once familiar.

  • 7-8: Adapts quickly and positively to changes; shows eagerness to learn new systems, applications, or security protocols; proficient in new processes relatively fast.

  • 9-10: Embraces change as an opportunity to learn and improve; actively seeks out training on new or advanced technologies relevant to the healthcare environment; helps others understand and adapt to changes; becomes an early expert and advocate for new systems or technical protocols.