The Trump administration's push to limit high scores on employee evaluations has raised alarm bells among National Park Service (NPS) staff, who are already reeling from a year of cuts and resignations. The new performance review process, which caps scores at 1-3 on a 1-to-5 scale, is seen as a deliberate attempt to undermine morale and make it easier for supervisors to justify layoffs.
According to Don Striker, a top regional director who oversees parks in Alaska, the directive was crafted by officials in Washington, including Russell Vought's Office of Management and Budget. "To the extent that they continue to do things that many of us feel are the reign of terror, that deliberately impact our morale in hopes that they'll drive us out, that's OMB and that's OPM," Striker said, referring to Vought's office.
The move is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to implement its "Department of Government Efficiency" agenda, which aims to reduce bureaucratic waste and increase efficiency. However, critics argue that this approach has been misapplied in the NPS, where employees are already working under intense pressure due to staffing shortages and declining resources.
Striker's comments have sparked outrage among NPS employees, who feel that their morale is being deliberately targeted by Washington officials. "It's just another method of trying to bring morale down," said one employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "A lot of people came into the government to do good work. They didn't come into the government to compete with others on who is the best across multiple parks with different missions."
The NPS has defended its new performance review process, saying it aims to ensure "fair, consistent performance evaluations" across all agencies. However, critics argue that this effort will only exacerbate the problem of morale and make it easier for supervisors to justify layoffs.
As one employee put it, "People back in D.C. are willing to shoot hostages." The comment reflects a growing sense of desperation among NPS staff, who feel that their livelihoods are being threatened by the Trump administration's policies.
In June, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance instructing federal agencies to ensure that they do not give out "disproportionate" numbers of high employee ratings. However, critics argue that this effort is too little, too late, and that the real problem lies with the Trump administration's overall approach to governance.
The NPS's performance review process has also been criticized for its lack of transparency and fairness. Employees who were already receiving annual ratings were forced to downgrade their scores in response to the new directive, with some supervisors downgrading scores even further as a way of avoiding controversy.
As one employee put it, "It was definitely pretty tense at times. People were pretty frustrated with the way the employee evaluation had gone." The comments reflect a growing sense of frustration among NPS staff, who feel that their voices are being ignored by Washington officials.
The Trump administration's push to limit high scores on employee evaluations is just the latest example of its efforts to undermine morale and make it easier for supervisors to justify layoffs. Critics argue that this approach will only exacerbate the problem of staffing shortages and declining resources in the NPS, leading to further declines in morale and an increase in turnover.
In a broader sense, the controversy highlights the growing divide between Washington officials and the people they serve. As one employee put it, "We're not just talking about morale. We're talking about the very existence of our agency."
The future of the NPS and other federal agencies hangs in the balance, as the Trump administration continues to push its agenda through executive orders and directives. One thing is clear: the impact on morale and staffing will be far-reaching, and it remains to be seen whether Washington officials will listen to the concerns of those who serve them.
According to Don Striker, a top regional director who oversees parks in Alaska, the directive was crafted by officials in Washington, including Russell Vought's Office of Management and Budget. "To the extent that they continue to do things that many of us feel are the reign of terror, that deliberately impact our morale in hopes that they'll drive us out, that's OMB and that's OPM," Striker said, referring to Vought's office.
The move is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to implement its "Department of Government Efficiency" agenda, which aims to reduce bureaucratic waste and increase efficiency. However, critics argue that this approach has been misapplied in the NPS, where employees are already working under intense pressure due to staffing shortages and declining resources.
Striker's comments have sparked outrage among NPS employees, who feel that their morale is being deliberately targeted by Washington officials. "It's just another method of trying to bring morale down," said one employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "A lot of people came into the government to do good work. They didn't come into the government to compete with others on who is the best across multiple parks with different missions."
The NPS has defended its new performance review process, saying it aims to ensure "fair, consistent performance evaluations" across all agencies. However, critics argue that this effort will only exacerbate the problem of morale and make it easier for supervisors to justify layoffs.
As one employee put it, "People back in D.C. are willing to shoot hostages." The comment reflects a growing sense of desperation among NPS staff, who feel that their livelihoods are being threatened by the Trump administration's policies.
In June, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance instructing federal agencies to ensure that they do not give out "disproportionate" numbers of high employee ratings. However, critics argue that this effort is too little, too late, and that the real problem lies with the Trump administration's overall approach to governance.
The NPS's performance review process has also been criticized for its lack of transparency and fairness. Employees who were already receiving annual ratings were forced to downgrade their scores in response to the new directive, with some supervisors downgrading scores even further as a way of avoiding controversy.
As one employee put it, "It was definitely pretty tense at times. People were pretty frustrated with the way the employee evaluation had gone." The comments reflect a growing sense of frustration among NPS staff, who feel that their voices are being ignored by Washington officials.
The Trump administration's push to limit high scores on employee evaluations is just the latest example of its efforts to undermine morale and make it easier for supervisors to justify layoffs. Critics argue that this approach will only exacerbate the problem of staffing shortages and declining resources in the NPS, leading to further declines in morale and an increase in turnover.
In a broader sense, the controversy highlights the growing divide between Washington officials and the people they serve. As one employee put it, "We're not just talking about morale. We're talking about the very existence of our agency."
The future of the NPS and other federal agencies hangs in the balance, as the Trump administration continues to push its agenda through executive orders and directives. One thing is clear: the impact on morale and staffing will be far-reaching, and it remains to be seen whether Washington officials will listen to the concerns of those who serve them.
. Like, what's next? They're already cutting staff left and right, so why would you wanna lower morale even more? It just feels like they don't care about the people on the ground who are actually making it happen 
. And honestly, it's hard to blame them for feeling frustrated - if you're already working hard with limited resources, the last thing you need is someone breathing down your neck about your performance 
.
The NPS staff are really caught in the middle here... They're already dealing with a ton of stress from staffing shortages & declining resources, so now this performance review thing just adds to it? 
A 1-3 score system is like, super vague, and I can see how that would lead to all sorts of problems. And yeah, the whole idea of "Department of Government Efficiency" just sounds like a fancy way of saying "we're gonna squeeze the life outta you" 
. It's no wonder morale is at an all-time low... 
... they're already struggling with low morale and high turnover due to budget cuts and staffing shortages. Now, the new performance review process is just gonna make things worse 
. It's like, they're trying to control every aspect of their lives, even their job evaluations! I get that efficiency is important, but not at the expense of people's well-being 
. The fact that supervisors can easily justify layoffs because of this system is just devastating 
. What's really going on here? Are we just pawns in a bigger game? 
NPS staff r going thru a lot rn & it's not cool they're tryin 2 undermine morale like that 
. The NPS staff are already struggling with cuts and resignations, so now they're being told to downplay their own work? It's like they're trying to shoot themselves in the foot 
. And what's up with the 1-3 scale? Is that even a real scoring system? 
. If they feel like their work isn't being valued or recognized, it's going to be hard for them to keep showing up and doing their best. And what happens if this policy gets implemented across all federal agencies? It could be disastrous 
. We need our government workers to be motivated and engaged, not just going through the motions because they're afraid of being fired 
.
. Do we really want to create an environment where people feel like their lives are at stake? I hope so, because if we don't, things could get ugly 
.
gotta wonder what's the point of having an admin that's more concerned with "efficiency" than actual people 
. We just worked hard and did our thing.
. I mean, have they ever had to deal with a staffing shortage or declining resources? Didn't think so 
.
. We need to find a better balance between accountability and compassion. It's time for Washington officials to listen to the concerns of those who serve them and work together to create a positive and supportive work environment 
.
this whole thing is just a mess, and i'm not sure how it's gonna play out in the end... 
It's not fair to the dedicated employees who are already working under intense pressure due to staffing shortages and declining resources 
The 1-3 score cap is just another way to micromanage and undermine trust 
. it's like, ppl who work in the government are already under so much stress and pressure. they don't need some Washington official telling them how to do their job or what score to give. its just so unprofessional and unfair.