Attorney Performance Evaluation Checklist

Identify whether this is an annual review, mid-year check-in, or partnership-track milestone review. Pull the employee's role profile — associate, paralegal, of counsel — and the competencies expected at their level. Junior associate criteria differ materially from senior associate criteria; using the wrong rubric is the most common review-cycle complaint.

Export the timekeeper's hours, realization rate, and write-down history from the practice management system (Clio, Centerbase, Tabs3, etc.) for the review period. Compare against the firm's billable target for the role. Note any matters with significant write-downs and the responsible partner's stated reason.

Send a structured feedback form to each partner or senior attorney who staffed the employee on a matter during the review period. Ask about specific deliverables — brief quality, deposition prep, due-diligence work — not generic impressions. Give responders 7 business days.

Send the employee a self-assessment covering matters worked, professional development goals, CLE completed, and self-identified areas for growth. The self-assessment frames the review conversation rather than driving the rating.

Review a sample of briefs, memos, contracts, or correspondence drafted during the period. Assess legal analysis, citation accuracy (Bluebook or local format), responsiveness to the assignment, and how much partner edit was required. Flag any work product that required substantial rewrite.

Evaluate Westlaw / Lexis usage, ability to identify controlling authority versus persuasive authority, and judgment in scoping research assignments. Junior attorneys should show progress on knowing when to stop researching and check in.

For litigators: review hearings argued, depositions taken or defended, and trial work during the period. Reference specific matters and supervising-attorney feedback. For transactional staff, substitute negotiation moments — drafting markups, closing-call performance, redline turnaround.

Confirm CLE hours completed against state bar requirements, including ethics and any mandatory diversity or mental health hours. Most states require 12-15 hours annually. A non-compliant attorney heading toward suspension is an HR issue, not a development goal.

Identify specific CLE programs the employee will attend before the bar reporting deadline. Coordinate with the firm administrator on payment and time-off coding. Set tickler reminders at 60 days, 30 days, and 7 days before deadline.

Pull docket records and statute-of-limitations entries for matters owned by this employee. Note any near-misses, extensions requested, or filings made close to deadline. Calendar discipline is the leading cause of malpractice claims; unreliable docketing is a serious issue regardless of other strengths.

Confirm the employee runs conflict checks before opening matters, accepting referrals, or interviewing lateral candidates. Rule 1.7 / 1.9 / 1.10 imputation issues are firm-wide risks; sloppy conflict habits at any level are a partner-conversation item.

For attorneys with IOLTA authority: review any trust transactions, three-way reconciliations, and disbursement requests during the period. Look for premature disbursements before retainer clearance and ledger errors. Rule 1.15 violations escalate quickly to the disciplinary board.

Sample client emails, status updates, and any client complaints received. Bar grievances frequently start with poor communication rather than substantive errors. For client-facing roles, review portal activity, callback turnaround, and engagement-letter scope adherence.

Synthesize work-product quality, billable performance, ethics record, and supervising-attorney feedback into a single rating. Anchor each rating to specific matters and observable behavior — not impressions. The rating drives compensation, partnership-track standing, and any improvement plan.

For ratings of Needs Improvement or Unsatisfactory: write a 60- or 90-day PIP with specific, observable goals — billable target, supervised matters with mandatory check-ins, written work product reviewed by a designated partner. Loop in firm administrator on documentation; this becomes the record if termination follows.

Define 3-5 concrete goals for the upcoming review period: practice-area depth (e.g., second-chair two depositions), business development (e.g., attend three bar-association events), or skill-building (e.g., complete trial advocacy CLE). Tie each to a measurable signal.

Block 60 minutes on the managing partner's and employee's calendars. Use a private conference room or secure video room — not an open office. Send the written evaluation 24 hours in advance so the employee can read it before the conversation.

Walk through the rating, supporting examples, and goals. Listen to the employee's response and note any factual disputes for follow-up. For PIP conversations, have the firm administrator present as a witness; document attendees and date.

Have the employee sign acknowledging receipt of the evaluation — not agreement with it. Capture any written rebuttal they want included in the personnel file. Use DocuSign or equivalent so the signature, date, and document version are tied together.

Store the signed evaluation, supporting feedback, self-assessment, and any PIP in the employee's confidential personnel file in the DMS. Restrict access to managing partner and firm administrator. Set a tickler for the next review cycle and any PIP check-in dates.