1 / 34

CFOA Evaluation Program

CFOA Evaluation Program. 2012 Season. Evaluation Purpose. Uniformed officiating. Evaluation Purpose. Uniformed officiating System to improve Playoff Crew selections. Evaluation Purpose. Uniformed officiating System to improve Playoff Crew selections

violet
Download Presentation

CFOA Evaluation Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CFOA Evaluation Program 2012 Season

  2. Evaluation Purpose Uniformed officiating

  3. Evaluation Purpose Uniformed officiating System to improve Playoff Crew selections

  4. Evaluation Purpose Uniformed officiating System to improve Playoff Crew selections System to rank an official among their peers

  5. Evaluations Conducted weekly by all Varsity Officials on Arbiter

  6. Evaluations Conducted weekly by all Varsity Officials on Arbiter The officials on the field will complete the crew evaluations.

  7. Evaluations Conducted weekly by all Varsity Officials on Arbiter The officials on the field will complete the crew evaluations. The clock operator is exempt

  8. Evaluations Conducted weekly by all Varsity Officials on Arbiter The officials on the field will complete the crew evaluations. The clock operator is exempt Scores will be 1 to 5 in each of the 6 categories

  9. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance

  10. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance Pre game duties

  11. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance Pre game duties Play and position coverage

  12. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance Pre game duties Play and position coverage Mechanics and signals

  13. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance Pre game duties Play and position coverage Mechanics and signals Judgment

  14. Grading Categories Uniform and appearance Pre game duties Play and position coverage Mechanics and signals Judgment Teamwork and professionalism

  15. Grading System 1 (One) Official needs improvement in several areas to attain fair level of competence. Performance may have poor impact on games officiated. Written CommentRequired. This is a below average official

  16. Grading System 2 (Two) Official maintains an almost average level of competence. Errors are small points, and transparent to the game being officiated. Performance ensures crew has no impact on games

  17. Grading System 3 (Three) Official maintains average level of competence. Performance has positive impact on games officiated. This is an average official

  18. Grading System 4 (Four) Official maintains excellent level of competence. Performance influences games for most equitable result. Adapts seamlessly as game conditions change.

  19. Grading System 5 (Five) Official maintains superior level of competence. Performance influences crew and game to best performance and result. Is able to teach - mentor colleagues to perform better. Subject matter expert Written Comment Required.

  20. Ranking System What does it consist of ?

  21. Ranking System What does it consist of? Your average of all evaluations in Arbiter

  22. Ranking System What does it consist of? Your average of all evaluations in Arbiter 80% of your evaluation score is from weekly evaluations

  23. Ranking System What does it consist of? Your average of all evaluations in Arbiter 80% of your evaluation score is from weekly evaluations 20% is from the score provided by a neutral evaluator

  24. Ranking System What does it consist of? Your average of all evaluations in Arbiter 80% of your evaluation score is from weekly evaluations 20% is from the score provided by a neutral evaluator Evaluations count for 80% of your ranking 20% of the score is your FHSAA ranking

  25. Ranking System FHSAA Ranking

  26. Ranking System FHSAA Ranking • Rank 1 Official will receive 5 points

  27. Ranking System FHSAA Ranking • Rank 1 Official will receive 5 points • Rank 2 Official will receive 4 points

  28. Ranking System FHSAA Ranking • Rank 1 Official will receive 5 points • Rank 2 Official will receive 4 points • Rank 3 Official will receive 0 points

  29. Ranking System FHSAA Ranking • Rank 1 Official will receive 5 points • Rank 2 Official will receive 4 points • Rank 3 Official will receive 0 points Rank 3 officials are not eligible for playoff assignments

  30. Ranking System Official has an average of 4 for crew evaluations. 4 x .8 = 3.2 Official’s individual average is 3 3 x .2 = .6 Averages totaled 3.2 + .6 = 3.8

  31. Ranking System Total of the average of both the evaluations are multiplied by .8 3.8 x.8 = 3.04 Officials FHSAA Rank is a 2 The official receives a 4 This is multiplied by .2 4 x.2 = .8

  32. Ranking System The Evaluation score and FHSAA rank score will be added together to give the Official his ranking among his peers Evaluations 3.04 + FHSAA Ranking .8 = 3.84 These rankings will change weekly based on the Officials evaluations.

  33. Expectations All Officials have until the following Thursday of the assigned game to complete the crew evaluation. Failure to do so results in a 0 for the week for the Official. All other Officials average will not be affected by the Officials failure to complete the evaluation.

  34. Questions During the season contact the evaluation Committee Greg Anderson Larry LaBelle Rob Price Have a great season

More Related