Cabinet of Ministers Regulations No. 532 in Riga august 7, 2007 (pr. Nr. 44) the Ministry of the Interior system and the prisons administration officials with a special service rank activities and outcomes evaluation order issued in accordance with the system of the Ministry of the Interior and of the institutions of the prison administration with a special service officer grade in the course of the service law in article 16, first paragraph 1. determines the order in which the system of the Ministry of the Interior authorities and prison administration authorities or their authorized officials created the evaluation the Commission shall assess the Interior Ministry system and prison administration officials with a special service rank ( hereinafter referred to as the officer) and its results.
2. the evaluation shall take place every two years.
3. the officer appointed or transferred to another post, evaluate if it is least consecutive posts at least six months.
4. Officer and officer's direct Manager fills out the form for the assessment of officials (annex 1) and the official assessment protocol (annex 2) to the appropriate section.
5. the Officer's direct supervisor organizes individual assessment was determined, inter, time and place of the interview and communicate it to the officer.
6. Officer and officer's direct supervisor assessment interview completed its assessment protocol sections that set: 6.1. tasks for the next evaluation period;
6.2. the assessment of officials.
7. the evaluation of residues in the following cases: 7.1 officer has suspended from their duties;
7.2. transient inability of officials, as well as the time when the person is on leave, Amat, mission or fails to fulfil the obligations of other valid reasons.
8. on the basis of the assessment of officials specified in the Protocol, infor lag, scoring the Commission officials.
9. the Commission shall consist of the Chairman of the Commission of the assessment and not less than two members of the Commission.
10. evaluation by the Commission can evaluate if the Commission officials participating at the hearing not less than half of the composition of the Commission.
11. If an official's direct supervisor of officials rated to "partly does not conform to specified requirements" or "does not meet the requirements" and the officer does not accept direct driver assessment, Evaluation Commission meeting also participates in Executive and officials evaluated the direct Manager.
12. If the Evaluation Commission evaluated by officials with "partly does not conform to specified requirements" or "does not meet the requirements", officials assess again after six months.
13. the minutes of the Commission of the assessment.
14. the Commission completed the assessment protocol of the official of the relevant section, and shall decide by a simple majority. If the votes are divided into equal, casting is the Chairman of the Commission of the assessment.
Prime Minister a. Halloween Interior Minister i. Godmanis Editorial Note: rules shall enter into force on 11 august 2007.
   
1. the annex to Cabinet of 7 august 2007 regulations no 532 officers evaluation form first name last name Department title rank position since the evaluation period, from the date of the previous evaluation to the previous assessment (assessment grade) Ceos of title 1 of the previous assessment identified in self-assessment tasks completion criteria i. and Office tasks execution of their duties, the evaluation period of the post in the self-assessment (record the appropriate rating level) A – meets the requirements (quality of the officials take office) B – partially meets the requirements (the officer does not make a sufficient quality from a job, found certain deficiencies that can prevent the period until the next evaluation) C – does not meet the requirements (not sufficient quality officials take office, found deficiencies in particular) legislation, job description and previous activities and outcomes of the official evaluation tasks set out in the Protocol that the evaluation period is not executed (specify which tasks are not executed in whole or in part) tasks the factors impinging on the personal factors the State or authorities level factors II. competences necessary for officials to self-evaluation assessment grade : A-the skill is developed at a level that allows the right to perform the duties (B), where the skill is sufficient to perform the duties of the minimum level, but should it develop C-the skills shortage hampers the performance of their duties, the cooperation with colleagues in personal responsibility and a desire to interact with others within the group, to work as a team. The ability to involve other tasks and making decisions. Skills relate to working with the staff and subject to the same level of employees and managers the ability to execute the responsibilities with a sense of responsibility. The need for control. The desire to raise their qualifications. Ability to complete tasks independently, without a special delegation to take on responsibilities and tasks, to engage actively in the resolution of a problem situation, to fulfil the obligations, chores get done in time. Enthusiasm and initiative in cooperation with the company (if it is necessary for the performance of official duties) planning and control skills to maintain permanent contact with people, to find out the public's needs and respond to them accordingly, create relationships between them, with the positive cooperation to improve the institution's prestige. Sociability, communicability, ability to choose priorities develop a work schedule, organize and plan work and closer and further the objectives, to provide time and effective use of resources. Competence includes not only plans but also regular work and verification of compliance with the plan and the necessary tampering. Competence includes the examination of the available information, the role and function of a clear definition of the business process, information storage, performance verification of compliance with the quality criteria laid down in the communication (communication) problem solving


The ability to convince others to adopt a belief or action. Ability to listen and to accept other views. Competence includes identifying other people (Group of people) influence, for example, using available information, arguments, consider means of psychological types of influence to achieve a certain objective capacity to find and get the information you need. The ability to get as much information as is required for all aspects of the problem, to distinguish between useful information from non-valid and important information from the irrelevant. Ability to accurately and quickly go into the available information, to examine all available information, to understand the situation and to draw logical conclusions. Ability to identify and combine the causes and benefits, as well as to make the right decisions in leadership (if you have employees subordinated) skills and personality characteristics that allows effective tasks given to subordinates, providing feedback, give support to achieve the tasks assigned, motivate them to work III. Future activities and the development of the self-assessment exercise 1, which can be attained in the next evaluation period, shortcomings that need to be resolved (to make a qualitative assessment of the next , tasks must be clearly defined as possible, measurable, achievable, results-oriented to a specific and particular deadline) 2. Required changes to the job description (if necessary, specify what changes would be necessary to develop specific job description) 3. Training needs (characteristics, skills, skills, knowledge, which should be developed to enhance work efficiency. Training courses that need to attend) 4. Possible career development (if an officer wants to change the conditions of service, specify a service that posts may be career development and what is its motivation) Officer (name) (date) (signature) title 2 direct driver assessment officials Evaluated the direct supervisor: name, last name, Department, position, officials Evaluated name to certain officials in the previous assessment tasks completion criteria i. officials of their duties and tasks the execution of their duties, in particular, the evaluation period for receipt of the fulfilment of the duties of the position (the corresponding assessment records the A-grade) meet the eligibility requirements (quality of officials take office) B – partially meets the requirements (the officer does not make a sufficient quality of the Office's obligations, in particular the deficiencies identified, which may prevent the period up to the next evaluation) C – does not meet the requirements (not sufficient quality officials take office, found deficiencies in particular) legislation, job description and previous activities and outcomes of the official assessment of the tasks laid down in the Protocol that evaluation period is not executed (specify which tasks are not executed in whole or in part) the tasks of the official reasons for the delay-dependent reasons (personally) from independent reasons officials II. required competences of Officials assessment assessment grade: A-the skill is developed at a level that allows the right to perform the duties (B), where the skill is sufficient to perform the duties of the minimum level, but should it develop C-the skills shortage hampers the performance of their duties, skill assessment description of the skill level of collaboration with colleagues in cooperation with (if you need to execute the responsibilities of) communication (communication) problem solving planning and control personal responsibility for personnel management (if is subordinated to staff) III. Officials and development plan 1. tasks that reach the next evaluation period, shortcomings that need to be resolved (to make a qualitative assessment of the next tasks must be clearly defined, measurable, achievable, results-oriented to a specific and particular deadline) 2. Required changes to the job description 3. Training needs (properties , skills, skills, knowledge, which should be developed to enhance work efficiency. Training courses that need to attend) 4. Possible career development (career development of potential and its motivation) officials direct supervisor (name) (date) (signature) Interior Minister i. Godmanis annex 2 Cabinet 2007 august 7, Regulation No 532 officers evaluation protocol officer's first name, last name, Department, position, officials direct the driver's first name, last name, Department, position, the date of the individual evaluation interviews officials officials direct driver self-assessment evaluation evaluation Commission decision 1. pursued the next evaluation period, shortcomings that need to be resolved (to make a qualitative assessment of the next tasks must be clearly defined, measurable, achievable, results-oriented to a specific and particular deadline) (completed) (completed officers direct Manager) (fill in the Evaluation Commission Secretary) 2. Required changes to the job description (if necessary, specify what changes would be necessary to develop specific job description) (completed) (completed officers direct Manager) (fill in the Evaluation Commission Secretary) 3. Training needs (properties , skills, skills, knowledge, which should be developed to enhance work efficiency. Training courses, you need to visit) (completed) (completed officers direct Manager) (fill in the Evaluation Commission Secretary) 4. possible career development (a service of the Office of career development is possible and what is its motivation) (completed) (completed officers direct Manager) (fill in the Evaluation Commission Secretary) evaluation the degree the degree evaluation of the assessment, the degree Evaluation Commission President (name) (signature) Evaluation Commission members: (name) (signature) (name) (signature) officer
 

 

(name, surname)

(signature)
Officers direct the driver (name) (signature) Interior Minister i. Godmanis