# Presentation: 235859

## MWA New SY Training
St. Louis, MO
29 April – 1 May 2008

**MWA New SY Training**
**St. Louis, MO**
**29 April – 1 May 2008**

- MWA New-SY Training, St. Louis, MO, April 29-May 1, 2008

## In Your Terms

- What does RPES mean?
- Research _**Position**_ Evaluation System
- Why do I need to worry about it?
- Important to both you and ARS
- When do I need to worry about it?
- Depends on what you want to achieve
- Now is good
- What do I do first?
- Learn as much as you can about this system
- What can I do **NOW** to help later?
- Stay tuned – that’s why we’re all here...

**Notes:**
Emphasize:
Position, not just person
Important to your growth and to ARS for your growth
NOW!
Learn here, and later. Don’t stop.

## But first, it’sAudience Participation Time

- How many years since PhD?
- How many ad hoc panels?
- Short form or long form?
- And a cultural question...
- How many understand baseball enough to understand the difference between batting for percentage and swinging for the home run?

**Notes:**
By this time, I’ll know (and tell) the GS grades.

## What is RPES?

- Research _Position_ Evaluation System
- The mechanism by which your grade will be determined as an ARS research scientist
- Is an opportunity for _noncompetitive_ advancement in your career with ARS
- Formally a re-classification, not a promotion
- Authority to classify positions delegated to panels
- That authority is unique to ARS
- With that authority comes a lot of procedures

**Notes:**
Classification
Delegation unique

## Research Position Classification

- Grading criteria are established in an official Federal standard
- The OPM Research Grade Evaluation Guide (RGEG)
- USDA-ARS Policies and Procedures are
- P&P 431.3-ARS
- ARS instructions are
-  431.3-Manual
- RPES web site has these and forms, plus some orientation information
- _[http://www.afm.ars.usda.gov/rpes/](http://www.afm.ars.usda.gov/rpes/)_
- Even with all that, you could still be lost...

## So... Let’s Talk

- About timing
- About panels
- About scores
- About case writeups
- About what matters
- About some statistics
- About some advice

## About Timing, part 1When Will You Be Scheduled?

**Mandatory **cyclic review based on current grade
- GS-12 and below, every 3 years
- GS-13, every 4 years
- GS-14 and above, every 5 years
**Exceptions, **which Area Director can approve
- Early Review
- Delayed Review
- Reevaluation
- Poor Performers

**Notes:**
Explain 
Give or take 6 months from last review or EOD. Tie to retention panel Terry will have explained.
early review with the recent example.
Also reevaluation

## About Timing, part 2When You Have Been Scheduled

- T-6 months – notice through MWA
- T-3 months – first draft of case due to MWA
- T-2 months
- – Final due MWA, then to RPES, then panel
- Panels research and score cases
- T-0 – Panel meets (Wed-Thu always)
- Preliminary scores posted
- Discussion to consensus (almost always)
- Results effective Thursday or Friday
- Usually communicated RPES>MWA>RL>SY on Friday
- T+1 month – Upgrades within 2 pay periods

## About Panels, part 1

- Panel Chair
- 3 Scientists from peer group 1
- 2 Scientists from peer group 2
- Personnel representative
- All score the cases
- 5 Scientists do in-depth reviews (IDR) on these cases (1 IDR per case)
- 8-13 cases per panel (in same 2 peer groups)

## About Panels, part 2

- Panel Chair
- Probably not your peer group
- 3 Scientists from peer group 1
- 2 Scientists from peer group 2
- Don’t know which is your peer group
- Personnel representative (not a scientist)
- Likely doesn’t know much about your peer group
- Therefore – and remember this - _very_ important! 		These are not, repeat, _**NOT**_** ****	****	**your grad school colleagues!

**Notes:**
So why is it that people write for their buddies?
Write your cases for the strangers in other disciplines who will score them!

## About Panels, part 3

- Panelists are
- From other peer groups or professions
- Even within your peer group, may know little about your field
- Impatient with sloppy cases
- Experienced at recognizing ‘science fiction’
- Busy
- Tired

**Notes:**
How do you feel when you get a manuscript to review that has typos, irregular reference style, grammar mistakes, etc?
Experience is the best teacher for science fiction recognition.
Aren’t you busy? Why wouldn’t they be?
After you read 3-4 papers, aren’t you tired?

## About Scores, part 1

- Case writeups are scored against the Guide (in your notebook)
- Specific characteristics of levels A, C, E, F
- B is between A and C
- D is between C and E
- For each of 4 Factors
- 1 – Research Assignment
- 2 – Supervisory Controls
- 3 – Guidelines and Originality
- 4 – Contributions, Impact, and Stature

## About Scores, part 2

| Factor | A | B | C | D | E | F |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1, 2, 3 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 |
| 4 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 16 | 20 | 24 |

| Grade | Scores | Letter | Mid-range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| GS-11 |  6–14 | A | 10=2-2-2-4 |
| GS-12 | 16–24 | B | 20=4-4-4-8 |
| GS-13 | 26–34 | C | 30=6-6-6-12 |
| GS-14 | 36–44 | D | 40=8-8-8-16 |
| GS-15 | 46–54 | E | 50=10-10-10-20 |
| ST | 56–60 | F | 60=12-12-12-24 |

**Notes:**
Note F4 is weighted 2X

## About Scores, part 3

- ARS-516 (in your notebook)
- Questions about the case
- Used by IDR (and some other panelists)
- Filled out before the panel sits
- Therefore, _**the answers to the 516 questions should be clearly visible in the case!**_

**Notes:**
The 516 is your friend. Not well known, but very useful.

## Possible Decisions

| Option | Code |
| --- | --- |
| Upgrade | UPG |
| Remain in Grade | RIG |
| Insufficient Factual Basis | IFB |
| Grade/Category Problem | GCP |
| Refer to Supergrade | REF |
| Split | SPL |

**Notes:**
UPG is what you want, RIG is common, REF is great. Others aren’t too common, and all bad.

## RPES Panel Decisions, FY-93 to FY-07

- 55

- 51

- 55

- 57

- 58

- 52

- 54

- 52

- 49

- 51

- 51

- 53

- 52

- 49

- 50

- 44

- 47

- 43

- 40

- 42

- 47

- 44

- 46

- 50

- 49

- 49

- 46

- 46

- 50

- 49

- 2

- 2

- 2

- 3

- 1

- 1

- 2

- 2

- 1

- 0.3

- 1

- 1

- 2

- 1

- 1

**Percentage**

- 1993

- 1994

- 1995

- 1996

- 1997

- 1998

- 1999

- 2000

- 2001

- 2002

- 2003

- 2004

- 2005

- 2006

- 2007

- 0

- 10

- 20

- 30

- 40

- 50

- 60

**Legend**

- RIG

- UPG

- IFB/GCP

**RPES Panel Decisions, FY-93 to FY-07**

**Notes:**
UPG 40-50%

## About Case Writeups

- Prescribed format (431.3 Manual)
- Road map to success, not restriction
- Factor 1 through 3B = Position Description
- Public information, ‘incumbent’, gender neutral, _**pro**_spective (next 3-5 years), nothing about your past (e.g., grants being administered currently)
- Factor 3C through 4 = Your Career
- Not public, name allowed, _**retro**_spective (whole career, even before ARS)

**Notes:**
Don’t fret over the format – use it.

## ARS 570 Contact Sheet

- Supervisor
- MWA Directors, at least Terry Nelsen
- National Program Leader
- Others who can speak to the impact of your research
- ARS, University, Stakeholders, etc.
- Reflect the scope of your stature
- i.e., if international, then include some

**Notes:**
Not all ARS. If claiming international stature, not all from USA.

## Factor 1 Research Assignment

- A. Assigned Responsibility
- B. Research Objectives and Methodology
- C. Expected Results
- D. Knowledge Required
- E. Supervisory Responsibilities

**Notes:**
Recall the 4 factors. Factor 1 is what you are hired to do.

## 1A. Assigned Responsibility

- Identify the organization, location, general area of work (including scope and research approach),
- and the specific National Program(s) under which the research is conducted
- Limits or boundaries of the area of work should be clearly stated
- Leadership roles should be explained

**Notes:**
Focus on responsibility here. Example follows.

## Factor 1 A example

- The incumbent is a Soil Scientist at the __ Research Unit, *(city, state)*. The Unit mission is to develop the knowledge and technology needed by land users to conserve soil for future generations. Within the unit’s mission, incumbent’s research is a component of ARS National Program 211–Water Availability and Watershed Management. Incumbent recognizes, conceives, plans, directs and conducts a research program in the areas of watershed hydrology that contributes to the understanding of how water, sediment, and pollutants are transported through the landscape, and how different management practices implemented in the field and watershed scales impact soil and water quality. The incumbent provides hydrology and water quality modeling leadership to the Unit.

**Notes:**
Show the 4 parts – position, unit mission, NP, research about what and what area incumbent provides leadership to in the team.

## 1B. Research Objectives and Methodology

- Describe: (1) the specific objectives within the assigned area of responsibility which will be pursued for the next 3 to 4 years, and
- (2) the methodology to be used as agreed upon by you and your immediate supervisor.
- If leadership is involved, distinguish between the objectives of the research team and those of your personal research assignment.
- Refer to the 516!

**Notes:**
1A wasn’t so bad. But 1B gets some people. See the 516.

## 1C. Expected Results

- State the expected results and the impact on science or technology that will result from successful completion of the research described in B above.
- New knowledge, best management practices, germplasm, models, decision support tools, products, inventions...

## Why are D & E in the case if not in the ARS-516?

- Factor 1 D. Knowledge required
- Needed to determine the occupational series (e.g., Chemist, GS-1320)
- Factor 1 E. Supervisory Responsibilities
- Most of this language is legal boilerplate. If panelists consider this element at all, it is most often as an indicator of breath of program responsibility.
- These are part of the job description

## Factor 2, Supervisory Controls

- Assigned Authority
- Technical Guidance Received
- Review of Results
- General Supervision

**Notes:**
Factor 2 is about freedom to do things (authority). It si the one that has caused most of the people I have reviewed the most problem. When I am IDR, I usually have to get these answers from the supervisor.

## 2A. Assigned Authority

- Summarize your freedom to do research and make decisions within the scope of the assignment.
- Include a statement about the complexity and/or alternative research approaches when the scope of, and freedom within, the assigned area permits such choices.

**Notes:**
See the 516!

## 2B. Technical Guidance Received

- Describe the general _technical _supervision received.
- Technical refers to the theoretical, experimental, and practical aspects of planning specific research activities in the assigned area of responsibility.
- ARS-516 now includes: (extent of review by supervisor prior to conducting research)
**Not administrative supervision – that’s in 2-D**

## 2C. Review of Results

- Describe the supervision received (freedom given) to analyze, interpret, and report results, and the nature and extent of your supervisor's review of manuscripts.
- ARS-516 now includes: (extent of review/verification of results/findings by supervisor)
**See the ARS-516 prompt!!!**

**Notes:**
Don’t go verbose on this one. Use the language in the 516.

## 2D. General Supervision

- Describe the broad supervision received, such as frequency and nature of contact with the supervisor, and your authority to make changes in the program or commit resources (personnel, supplies, equipment, budget, etc.)
- See the 3 questions on the 516!
- What changes need approval?
- Responsibility for:
- Freedom to:

**Notes:**
This one is done very badly. People aren’t aware of the 516.

## Factor 3 - Guidelines and Originality

- A. Available Literature
- B. Originality Required
-   --- end of 3-page Position Description
-   --- starts the part about you
- C. Demonstrated Originality

**Notes:**
Reinforce the prospective first 3 pages and starting the retrospective part about them, with names.

## 3A. Available Literature

- _Indicate the extent to which literature applies to_ the assigned area, the specific objectives currently being pursued, and the methodology being used.
- Depend on the ARS-516 for this

**Notes:**
Ambiguous list entry ‘the’. The list doesn’t start with ‘Indicate’, but the second ‘to’. Don’t do this one without the 516.

## 3B. Originality Required

- Indicate the difficulty in identifying specific objectives or hypotheses or expected results, and in converting abstract concepts to easily understood statements or theories.
- If appropriate, the extent to which new areas of investigation might be opened should be described to help reflect the originality required.
- See the ARS-516 to make sense of this.

**Notes:**
Again, see the 516.

## 3C. Demonstrated Originality

**In a paragraph not to exceed 1⁄2 page**, describe the originality and creativity demonstrated in the research assignment and considered the best evidence of originality related to the current assignment.
- Some specific accomplishments should be cited, but do not restate the details of accomplishments described under Factor 4.
- Needless details, verbosity, and reiteration of Demonstrated Accomplishments will not strengthen the case.
- Not how important something is (impact in 4-A).
- What is new, first, invented, created, developed, etc?

**Notes:**
The 516 isn’t much help here. 
Most people get into impact. Stay focused on what is original. 
It is ok to cross reference to acc #s, but just point out what is original. 

## Factor 4 - Contributions, Impact, and Stature

- Demonstrated Accomplishments
- Stature and Recognition
- Advisory and Consultant Activities
- Other
- Publications

**Notes:**
Factor 4 is a CV. Unusual format, but a CV

## Factor 4 Preamble

- You may use an introductory paragraph
- No more than 1/3 page
- Consider it an abstract
- No prescribed content, despite examples
- What are you known for?
- How is it documented?
- How widely are you known?
- What is the best evidence of your stature?

**Notes:**
Most of us read this first.

## 4A. Demonstrated Accomplishments

- Maximum number:
- 3 for 11-12, 5 for 13, 8 for 14 and up
- Prescribed format
- Short statement (optional, but useful)
- Accomplishment
- Role
- Impact
- Exhibits
- Other relevant publications
- This is the most important part of the case writeup – do it well

**Notes:**
No requirement for maximum number.
Explain the value of the short statement.
Explain impact to public, not to you.

## 4B. Stature and Recognition

- 1)	Honors and Awards
- 2) 	Special Invitations
- 3) 	Offices and Committee Assignments Held in Professional and Honorary Societies
- 4) 	Participation in Professional Meetings, Technical Conferences, Workshops, etc.
- These categories are here for a purpose, so if any are empty, fix that for later cases.

**Notes:**
Reviews are the first thing most people do. Some of this accrues when you get good pubs out and get noticed.
Participate in unit awards nomination processes
Attend meetings and participate – eventually you’ll be noticed and asked to serve.
Same for invitations – get known as someone who delivers. 
Absolutely don’t get known as someone who initially agrees to do something and then doesn’t follow through. Defaulting on an invite gets a person a bad reputation.
Don’t get know as someone who turns everything down – be selective, but be willing.

## 4C. Advisory and Consultant Activities

- 1) Professional Advisory and Consulting Activities
- 2) Special Assignments
- Outside ARS goes in 1
- Within ARS usually goes in 2

**Notes:**
Same here – if empty, work on it.
Keep some record of who asked you for something, when it was, what you gave them. If in person, good. If by e-mail, ok.
If you get a zillion requests for reprints, even that. You don’t need to recite all of them, but knowing numbers for the case is useful sometimes.

## 4D. Other

- Educational Background
- Degrees received only
- 2) Research Experience
- Paid research positions only
- 3) Other Significant Information
- Grants funded
- University activities – students, adjunct
- Visiting scientists and post-docs hosted
- Manuscripts submitted
- Popular press, news items, web information other parties write about your research

**Notes:**
Don’t list colleges attended, just degrees.
Don’t list adjunct positions in 2 – put in 3.
Keep track of media distributions about your work. Occasionally do a google of ‘name ARS city’

## E. Publications

- 1)	Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications and Patents
- 2) Additional Publications
- Note the interim guidance changed these headings
- Peer-reviewed book chapters and proceedings go in 2
- No abstracts, even if called a proceedings

**Notes:**
When MWA AAD, I saw one with a slew of 1-page proceedings papers. That would raise a flag for me at least. 
Disciplines differ about relative numbers in 1 and 2. My field is common to have published proceedings. In some, almost never. So in my field, none in the #2 side suggests lack of meeting participation. And if only 2 in my field, a big problem. In some fields, any suggests lack of sending to per-reviewed outlet. Check your colleagues for what is common here.

## About What Matters

- Underlying concept is “impact of the person in the job”
- Assesses your ***career-long*** documented contributions, and resultant ***stature and**** ****recognition***, with a definite eye on ***recency***

**Notes:**
Talk about recency – if you stop, you drop.

## ST

- GS-15
- GS-14
- GS-13
- GS-12

- Research
- Publications / **IMPACT**
- CRIS planning
- Journal reviews
- Local committees
- Mentor communications
- Local / regional invitations
- Graduate students  ? ? ?
- Professional meetings

**Notes:**
Talk a bit about how things change from early to late – scope, geographic extent.
Discipline-oriented vs problem oriented.
Publish early to get impact later.
Note local first.
Establish a consistent presence at your main national meeting. Even if you don’t have funds, don’t disappear off the association radar screen.

## ST

- Regional / national invitations
- Professional societies
- Associate editorship
- Award nominations
- Research
- Publications / **IMPACT **
- CRIS planning
- Journal reviews
- Local committees
- Local / regional invitations
- Graduate students  ? ? ?
- Professional meetings

- GS-15
- GS-14
- GS-13
- GS-12

**Notes:**
A little more regional in scope, trending toward national

## ST

- Elected society positions
- CRIS leadership
- Awards
- Mentoring
- International invitations
- Book chapter authorship
- Many invitations
- Associate editorship
- Award nominations
- Research / **IMPACT**
- Publications
- Journal reviews
- Local committees
- Graduate students  ? ? ?
- Professional meetings

- GS-15
- GS-14
- GS-13
- GS-12

**Notes:**
Now international, invites for books, etc. Early awards. Some elected positions.

## ST

- Leadership
- Elected society positions
- CRIS leadership
- Awards
- Mentoring
- International invitations
- Book chapter authorship
- Many invitations
- Associate editorship
- Award nominations
- Research / **IMPACT**
- Publications
- Journal reviews
- Local committees
- Graduate students  ? ? ?
- Professional meetings

- GS-15
- GS-14
- GS-13
- GS-12

**Notes:**
More leadership, more of the int’l, more and/or bigger awards. Fellows, competitive awards. Mentoring visiting scientists and post-docs.

## ST

- Awards, impact, program, reputation
- Leadership
- Elected society positions
- CRIS leadership
- Awards
- Mentoring
- International invitations
- Book chapter authorship
- Many invitations
- Associate editorship
- Award nominations
- Research
- Publications / **IMPACT**
- Journal reviews
- Local committees
- Graduate students  ? ? ?
- Professional meetings

- GS-15
- GS-14
- GS-13
- GS-12

**Notes:**
Supergrade – 4 criteria
Nat’l or Int’l competitive awards (1/year, each year)
Recruiting incentive for visiting sci and post-docs
Impact on agency program
Impact on science outside your field.
Note that grad students are still a ? ? ?

## About some statistics

- In the final analysis, impact is related more to quality than to quantity.
- But the first requirement for junior scientists is to publish!
- In this context, consider peer-reviewed journal publications as the threshold.
- Being widely cited can be impact on science.
- Having research results adopted leads to impact on the US public.

## Slide 48

**Notes:**
Animated.
This is just statistics to show things that are common – no way is it a promise. Evidenced by scatter.
Peer-reviewed publications at time of promotion.
2/year is minimum. Note the longer time frame for those near minimum, shorter for those well above
Note that the higher grades move ever further above the minimum
Don’t fall into the void!

## ST

**Notes:**
Also animated.
Avoid the brown one! Career GS-12.
Mention 25% supergrade is not realistic, just happened that the fellow who did this slide was one and he had one more case
Note the green one had 2 RIGs at 12 and 13, then went 14-15-ST in the next 3 panels.
The blue one is a lot more common – many retire at 15. There is no shame for that happening.
My old RL always said he didn’t want to hire SY’s that didn’t have the ability and the desire to be GS-15.

## Where do I start?

- Sketch the accomplishment statements for your next case, now.
- Pencil in the exhibits to document the accomplishments.
- Sort your awards, invitations, society service, meetings, consulting, special assignments, other items, and publications per the RPES format.
- Flesh out the accomplishments.
- Write the Factor 4 preamble.
- Write Factors 1, 2, 3.
- For the next few years, fill in the gaps.

**Notes:**
This is my recommendation to my people. No endorsement by ARS implied.

## Parting Advice

- Find and communicate with a mentor who knows RPES
- Graduate from discipline-oriented to problem solving
- Work on important problems
- Do solid work
- Leverage with teamwork so you can solve bigger problems
- Think toward the next case writeup
- Consider supergrade criteria

**Notes:**
This is my recommendation to my people. No endorsement by ARS implied.

## We all look forward to your success!