Ministry of Health approves annual evaluation of approximately 80,000 employees for 2025 and makes results and appeals available via ESS

AbdulKarim Al-Abdullah: The Ministry of Health has approved the results of the annual evaluation for approximately 80,000 male and female employees for the year 2025, following the completion of the competency and performance assessment process for various job categories across the ministry’s sectors. The results have been made available electronically via the “ESS” application, enabling employees to view their evaluation outcomes and submit appeal requests electronically in accordance with approved procedures and deadlines.

The evaluation process covered both Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti employees, including doctors, nurses, technicians, engineers, and administrative staff, as well as other job categories and roles working within the Ministry of Health, in line with the rules, foundations, and procedures governing performance evaluation.

This initiative was based on Civil Service Council decisions that regulate the foundations, procedures, and timelines for employee performance evaluation and appeals, as well as the application of metrics measuring adherence to official working hours as part of the evaluation criteria.

Sources confirmed that the Ministry of Health continued to rely on the electronic system throughout all stages of the evaluation process, starting from the entry of the employee’s evaluation by their direct supervisor, through its review and approval by the next level of management, up to the issuance of results and their electronic availability to employees.

This move aligns with the ministry’s strategy to develop administrative and human resources services and reduce paperwork cycles, thereby enhancing the efficiency of processing procedures for large numbers of employees and improving the accuracy and speed of handling evaluation data.

The evaluation process includes all employees subject to performance assessment rules across general job categories, special contracts, and bonus items. It also involves entering data for employees who are not eligible for an actual evaluation and specifying the reason for non-evaluation in accordance with established regulations.

The evaluation mechanism adheres to the Civil Service Council decision regarding the addition of the fifth group, which pertains to “metrics measuring adherence to official working hours.” This group accounts for 30% of the employee’s overall rating, while the other evaluation groups constitute the remaining 70%.

This mechanism is significant for linking job performance evaluation to the employee’s actual level of attendance commitment, alongside other performance and competency metrics that determine the final annual rating.

The evaluation mechanism holds the direct supervisor responsible for the accuracy and correctness of data regarding their subordinates. The evaluator must have an official appointment or secondment decision to a supervisory position that authorizes them to conduct evaluations.

Furthermore, the evaluation of holders of certain leadership and supervisory positions is subject to quality standards and controls, including Health Area Directors, Hospital Directors, Deputy Hospital Directors, Heads of Primary Health Care, and Heads of Nursing in the Health Area.

The mechanism also regulates the evaluation of seconded and transferred employees during the evaluation year. A seconded employee is evaluated by the entity where they served the longest period, in accordance with Article 8 of Civil Service Council Decision No. 36 of 2006.

In cases where an employee is transferred before the end of the evaluation year, the receiving entity assumes responsibility for the evaluation. The transferring entity must provide a report containing its opinion on the employee’s performance during the portion of the evaluation year spent with them, within 15 days of the transfer date, in accordance with established regulations.

A fundamental rule in the evaluation process is that employees who have not completed 100 actual working days during the evaluation year are not evaluated. In such cases, their previous evaluation is carried forward, in accordance with Article 4 of Civil Service Council Decision No. 36 of 2006.

The rules also cover special cases for reappointed employees, seconded staff, and those on various types of long leave, provided they meet the legally prescribed duration required to undergo evaluation.

The mechanism also addresses situations where the direct supervisor is unable to evaluate employees, whether due to the end of their service, transfer, secondment, absence for any reason, or if they are newly appointed, transferred, or seconded in a manner that prevents them from objectively assessing the performance of their subordinates. In such cases, the next level of management replaces the direct supervisor in the evaluation process, with the necessity of recording notes and reasons in the designated recommendations field, in accordance with governing rules.

Evaluation guidelines emphasize that if an employee receives a rating below “Excellent” (i.e., “Very Good,” “Good,” or “Weak”), the direct supervisor and the next level of management must state the reasons and justifications for this rating and record them in the designated fields in the evaluation system.

This procedure aims to enhance the objectivity of the evaluation and clarify the basis upon which the manager determined the employee’s performance level, thereby allowing for the review of the evaluation when an appeal is submitted in accordance with established rules.

Following the completion and approval of the annual evaluations for 2025, the Ministry of Health made the results available to employees electronically via the “ESS” application, enabling each employee to view their evaluation result through the electronic system.

The ministry also facilitated the electronic submission of appeal requests regarding evaluation results in accordance with the procedures and deadlines approved within the same application, contributing to streamlining procedures, saving time and effort, and providing an electronic channel for handling evaluation review requests.