UPDATE 2 | National Park Superintendents Ordered To Cap Employee Evaluations

Editor's note: This is updates with acting National Park Service Director Jessica Bowron disavowing any cap on employee appraisals.

A day after top National Park Service officials, in an apparent violation of federal law, directed park superintendents to reduce evaluation scores for employees, including themselves, the agency's acting director disavowed any hard cap.

"I will unequivocally state that there is no hard and fast rule regarding how many 'fully successfuls' vs. 'outstanding' in each region or directorate is targeting," Jessica Bowron, the Park Service's comptroller who has been "exercising the delegated authority of the Director," wrote in an email sent to the agency's associate and regional directors hours after the National Parks Traveler's story about the cap appeared.

In that email, which the Traveler obtained, Bowron also noted that "discussions to-date with you have indicated that not all leadership has sufficiently incorporated the Administration's expectations regarding performance ratings, and that in some areas, a disproportionate number of employees are rated above fully successful without sufficient justification. I expect that to be addressed before this process ends. As directed in the December 9th guidance from the [Associated Director] for Workforce, ratings should not have been issued to employees until leadership has reviewed them."

Bowron's email followed by a day a directive that Frank Lands, the agency's deputy director for operations, issued to regional directors and park superintendents that they give most of their employees an appraisal that they were "fully successful" in their jobs but not "outstanding" or having "exceeded expectations."

Interior Department officials Friday morning disputed the details of Lands' directive that were shared with the Traveler.

"There is no percentage cap on (employee) ratings. Consistent with (the Office of Personnel Management)'s government-wide performance management guidance, we are working to normalize ratings across the agency," Interior's press office said in an email. "The goal of this effort is to ensure fair, consistent performance evaluations across all of our parks and programs."

But late Thursday and early Friday the Traveler had been contacted by several current and recently retired Park Service personnel familiar with Lands' directive, and internal NPS emails provided the Traveler outlining the guidance verified what he told superintendents.

The call was viewed as another strike against employee morale.

"It’s insulting to tell people who work their asses off, many of whom are doing multiple jobs to keep their parks operating, that they are not worth fair evaluations, and by implications, won’t even be considered for annual performance awards," a retired superintendent familiar with Lands' call said. 

Under 5 CFR 430.208, "[A] rating of record shall be based only on the evaluation of actual job performance for the designated appraisal period."

"The method for deriving and assigning a summary level may not limit or require the use of particular summary levels (i.e., establish a forced distribution of summary levels)," the law adds.

According to information provided by an active Park Service employee, "[S]upervisors were instructed (not in writing of course) to limit the number of staff who are allowed to receive ratings higher than a 3. Once the (employee evaluations) are rated, they are sent to region for approval. If they don't approve or there are too many 4/5, it gets kicked back to parks and changed to 3s." 

"It is also rumored that regional directors' jobs are under threat if they don't force compliance," the employee added in an email.

According to the employee, no more than 5 percent of a park's workforce could be rated as "outstanding," while 25 percent could be rated as having exceeded expectations, with the rest receiving a level 3 rating, or "fully successful."

Superintendents on the call with Lands were critical of his directive.

"Most 'supers' are putting language in the evaluations they give out saying this is not a true reflection of performance, and they are giving the mandated level 3 under duress," said the retired superintendent. "Superintendents are really pissed."

At the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks, Executive Director Emily Thompson said that, "park superintendents are under an immense amount of pressure to meet arbitrary ratings as they appraise their employees' performance. Superintendents are being directed to rate nearly all employees, regardless of their accomplishments, at no higher than a 3 — which has traditionally been viewed as a barely passing, “C” grade."

"When superintendents have pushed back against these arbitrary target levels, they’ve been threatened with insubordination charges and job loss," she added. "NPS employees — from superintendents down — have done incredible work in a difficult year and deserve better than an artificial rating that doesn’t reflect their accomplishments. Not only is this a further hit on employee morale, it has financial ramifications and could impact job security and future promotions.

"The guidance being handed down to superintendents is ethically and legally questionable, and completely unacceptable," added Thompson.

Documents shared with the Traveler included internal NPS emails that stated Lands' directive to cap "outstanding" ratings at no more than 1-5 percent of a park's workforce. In addition, all evaluations completed prior to Thursday needed to be returned for review.

One email shared with the Traveler came from a park superintendent who directed his staff to rate all employees, including himself, no higher than level 3.

Bowron in her email Friday afternoon said she was addressing "confusion" surrounding the 2025 performance evaluations, and noted that the Park Service leadership "is working to end inflation of employee performance ratings and normalize these ratings across parks, regions," and Washington headquarters.

"This is critical to ensuring that all employees' performance, regardless of location on the (organizational) chart, is considered through the same lens," she wrote. 

Many, if not most, Park Service employees have been under tremendous pressure since President Donald Trump began his second term in January. They've had to deal with a hold on seasonal employee hiring, been asked and encouraged to retire, and constantly been under fear of being fired.