At the facility where I work, we are subject to yearly clinical evaluations. Our merit raise is suppose to be based on our evaluation score. The evals are done by the nurse managers and clinical supervisors, with the input of peers. At my last eval, I was told that all evaluations have to be reviewed by the hospital administator(new policy?) and, if he felt that a particular eval score was too high, then the supervisor doing that particular eval would have to scale it back. This of course would lead to a smaller raise. Does this kind of stuff go on at other hospitals? This administrator doesn't even know me or what kind of job I do. I was informed of this only after noticing that some of the numbers on the eval had obviously been changed. I know this administrator is looking at the bottom line, but if the administation is going to negate the results of peer review and clinical evals, then why even waste the time in the first place? There is a ceiling on the amount of raise you can receive and if an eval happens to show that one exceeds that ceiling, then the numbers get changed to make it look legit. It is very bad for morale. The managers and supervisors don't like it anymore than the rest of us, but that is the way it is, so we are told. Any ideas on what can be done about this??