Yellow Jacket Initiative
Notes · October 23, 2026

The Rating Curve Moves Up a Grade: OPM's New Rule for Senior Scientists and Experts

A final rule effective November 18 lets OPM set a forced rating distribution for the government's SL and ST experts and ends their informal grievance. The preamble promises limits that the regulatory text does not contain.

By E. Lawrence Anderson, Yellow Jacket Initiative

Senior-level (SL) and scientific or professional (ST) employees are the government's top non-executive experts. They sit above GS-15 without being executives. A final rule from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget, published October 19 and effective November 18, 2026, changes how they are rated and what they can do about a rating.

First, the government's own explanation. OPM says senior-professional ratings are inflated. In fiscal years 2023 and 2024, it says, approximately 90 percent of senior professionals received Level 4 or Level 5 ratings, and less than half of one percent were rated below Level 3 ("Fully Successful"). These are OPM's figures. Guidance did not fix the problem, OPM says, so the rule lines up SL/ST appraisal with the Senior Executive Service. By statute (5 U.S.C. 4312(d)), SES appraisals and ratings are not appealable. OPM says the new process gives every senior professional a written response and a higher-level review of an initial rating at any rating level, plus review by a Performance Review Board. It says statutory routes, such as appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board and EEO processes, remain available where they apply.

What the text does.

Where the preamble and the text differ. Both gaps come from the document itself.

  1. Scope of the curve. The preamble says "OPM intends that the standardized distribution will apply only to the assignment of the highest performance rating levels (Levels 4 and 5)," with no quota at Level 3 or below. The regulatory text authorizes a distribution of "some or all rating levels."
  2. Political appointees. The preamble says "OPM is excluding Schedule C and Schedule G excepted service appointees," to remove "even the perception" that the curve could favor them. The regulatory text says they "may be excluded from such standardized distribution requirements, as determined by OPM."

A preamble states intent. The regulatory text sets the limits of the authority. In both cases the text allows more than the preamble describes.

Context. This is the SL/ST counterpart of OPM's appraisal rule for General Schedule, prevailing-rate and certain other employees (published July 7 and effective August 6, 2026; 91 FR 41521, RIN 3206-AP06). In our reading, that rule showed the same gap between stated intent and granted authority. The structure has now been extended one grade up.

What we have not established. OPM says more than 60 federal agencies employ SL or ST staff. The parts of the rule we read do not say how many employees it covers. We do not know whether OPM has already set a distribution for senior professionals, or at which levels. Commenters' concerns about political pressure on ratings are their claims, and OPM disputes them. We resolve neither side.

Sources: OPM and OMB, Managing Senior Professional Performance, final rule, 91 FR 65904–65924 (Oct. 19, 2026), FR Doc 2026-21316, RINs 3206-AO88 and 0348-AB92, Docket OPM-2025-0011: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-10-19/pdf/2026-21316.pdf. Regulatory text cited: 5 CFR 430.505(d), 430.509(e), 430.511, 430.512(a). Proposed rule: 91 FR 8763 (Feb. 24, 2026). Rule first read October 16, 2026 (public inspection) and re-read in its published form October 23, 2026; the Federal Register listed no correction to it as of that date.

Read the text.

Independent Research. All Documents Freely Reproducible.

Also published on Substack.