To evaluate and screen public servants, the 2025 Law on Cadres and Public Servants,  stipulates principles, authority, content, evaluation methods, and quality classification based on continuous, multi-dimensional, and quantitative monitoring using specific criteria tied to progress, quantity, and quality of results and products according to job positions (KPI).

Agencies will use evaluation results to determine rewards, additional income benefits, bonuses, or consider reassigning to lower positions or terminating employment to filter out those who fail to meet task requirements. The law clearly defines the responsibilities of leaders in managing, evaluating, and utilizing public servants according to their capabilities and appropriate job positions.

MHA is seeking feedback on a draft decree on evaluating and classifying public servant quality. A key highlight of this proposal is that evaluations will not only be implemented at year-end but will occur throughout the working year, with mechanisms for monthly and quarterly monitoring and scoring.

Year-end assessment results must be finalized before December 15, or no later than January 15 of the following year for special units.

A notable change is the application of an evaluation result transition mechanism when civil servants are transferred to other positions. 

According to the draft, the old agency will have to send the evaluation results of the last six months to the new agency, which will be the basis for calculating the average score for the whole year. This regulation is aimed at preventing civil servants from getting "blank points" and at the same time ensuring that the evaluation is not interrupted.

The public servant scoring system is built on a 100-point scale. Those with 90 points and above mean “Outstanding task completion”; 70 to under 90 points mean “Good task completion”; 50 to under 70 points mean “Task completion”; below 50 points or with serious violations “Non-completion of tasks”.

This evaluation method aims for quantification and transparency, replacing the previous qualitative comment-based approach.

Public servants will self-report their annual work quality, present it at a unit meeting for feedback, and receive scores.

Meeting attendees are determined based on the position of the person being evaluated. For heads, meetings involve the leadership collective, representatives of the party committee, and socio-political organizations. For deputies or other positions, meetings include all public servants of the unit.

Subsequently, the party committee at the same level will provide written feedback. The personnel agency compiles documents, cross-checks with the scoring scale, prepares official score sheets, and submits them to the competent authority for approval.

Classification results will be sent directly to public servants, publicly disclosed at the agency or unit, and updated on the electronic system for storage in personnel records.

Enhancing transparency and fairness

The draft proposes using evaluation results for three main purposes. First, monthly scores help promptly identify difficulties, propose solutions, and adjust workloads.

Second, semi-annual and year-end results serve as the basis for job placement, position changes, and determining additional bonuses, up to 10 percent of the agency’s salary fund.

Third, the classifications serve as key criteria for public servant planning, appointments, dismissals, rotations, rewards, and disciplinary actions.

The draft also requires retaining complete evaluation records on electronic systems and in hard copies (for minutes, score sheets, party committee comments, etc.) to ensure long-term traceability and prevent unauthorized loss or edits.

Another new point is that public servants will proactively track completed tasks, propose standard products suitable for their positions, and update work logs promptly. This approach aims to enhance self-management and accountability.

MHA stated that the draft decree is open for feedback from ministries, localities, experts, and businesses. If approved, the scoring-based evaluation system, from monthly monitoring to year-end aggregation, is expected to foster competition while enhancing transparency and fairness in utilizing and rewarding public servants.

Regarding cadre evaluation, Khanh Hoa has officially applied the KPI-based formula across its entire political system since April 1, following a few months of trial.

The province’s goal is to innovate management methods and improve cadre quality.

The process involves public servants self-recording tasks, with leaders evaluating based on software data and direct feedback.

Pham Anh Tuan, the new Chair of Gia Lai People’s Committee, once said when he was Chair of Binh Dinh before the merger, that the province would create classifications for cadres linked to public service efficiency, and develop evaluation criteria, including specific KPIs to measure productivity and task quality.

Tran Thuong