Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
SCHOOLS DIVISION OFFICE - LEYTE
Government Center, Candahug, Palo, Leyte

OFFICE PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT AND REVIEW FORM (OPCRF)

Name of Employee : Nate of Rater :

Position : Position :
Rating Period : Date of Review :
Bureau/Center/Service :
TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 1 LEADING STRATEGICALLY

Strand 1.2 School Planning & 1.BE-LCP concurred with teachers

Implementation and stakeholders and noted and
reviewed by District Head. 95%-100% implementation 85%-94% implementation of 75%-84% implementation of 74% and below
Quality of projects from the BE-LCP projects from the BE-LCP projects from the BE-LCP implementation of projects No evidence shown
from the BE-LCP
Engaged the school community in the
development and implementation of 2.LDM Implementation Plan
school plans aligned with institutional
goals and policies.

3.LDM Implementation Plan that

contains information/updates about
the status of the Q1-Q4 activities
indicated
Efficiency Submitted 4 different Submitted 3 different Submitted 2 different Submitted 1 acceptable No MOV submitted
acceptable MOVs acceptable MOVs acceptable MOVs MOV

4. Any document showing that the BE-

LCP was presented to the
stakeholders
10%

(MOVs may include but not limited to

ACR/minutes of the meeting)

5. Any document showing

stakeholders’ support in the
implementation of school plans
Timeliness

(MOVs may include but not limited to

ACR/minutes of the meeting,
approved resolution, letter of
commitment, pledge of support)

Page 1 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
Strand 1.4 Research and Innovation
1.LDM Decision Tree and

LDM Readiness Assessment Results

(RAR) Identified learners’ needs
and collaborated with Identified learners’ needs Identified learners’ needs
colleagues in the crafting and collaborated with and collaborated with No acceptable evidence
Quality and implementation of colleagues in the crafting colleagues in the crafting of Identified learners’ needs. was shown.
innovations / interventions and implementation of innovations / interventions.
2. Innovation / intervention aligned to coupled with developed innovations / interventions.
the LDM RA results reviewed by the research proposal.
District Head and approved by
Schools Division Research Committee
(SDRC)

Collaborated with school personnel

in the conduct of research and
utilization of findings in facilitating 5%
data-driven and evidence-based 3. ACR on the implementation of the
innovations to improve school innovation / intervention highlighting Efficiency Submitted 4 different MOVs Submitted 3 different MOVs Submitted 2 different MOVs Submitted 1 MOV NO MOV submitted
performance. its effects on students’/teachers’ 25%
performance.

4. Research proposal* aligned to the

intervention/innovation approved by
the District Head or LDO.

Timeliness
*For OPCRF purposes, signed by District
Head

*For promotion purposes, signed by LDO

Page 2 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
Strand 1.6 Learner Voice 1.LDM Decision Tree

Conducted Learner
Enrolment Survey, Conducted Learner
consolidated data and Enrolment Survey, Conducted Learner
2.Adjusted LDM Decision Tree Quality utilized results in the LAC consolidated data and Enrolment Survey and Conducted Learner No Learner Enrolment
highlighting the changes/adjustments Session or meeting and, utilized results in the LAC consolidated data Enrolment Survey Survey conducted
Utilized learners’ voice, such as with attached certification from the LDM Decision Tree Session or meeting
feelings, views and or opinions to District Head highlighting the adjusted
inform policy & decision making data
5%
towards school improvement.

3.ACR/Minutes on the conduct of LAC Efficiency

Session/Meeting

(addressing learners’ feedback) Timeliness

Strand 1.7 Monitoring & Evaluation

Processes and Tools 1.LDM M & E Plan
Utilized available monitoring
and evaluation processes Analyzed available Gathered and consolidated
and tools to address Utilized available monitoring monitoring and evaluation available monitoring and
learning gaps with and evaluation processes processes and tools results evaluation processes and
Quality agreement on and tools results to address No evidence shown
implementation of feedback learning gaps to promote to address promote
learning gaps to tools results to address
learners’ learning gaps to promote
2.Adjusted M & E Plan highlighting the generated from learners’ achievement. achievement. learners’ achievement.
changes/adjustments with attached stakeholders to improve
certification from the District Head learners’ achievement.
Utilized available monitoring and 5%
evaluation processes and tools to
promote learner achievement.

3.SMEA Result with list of Issues and

Resolutions
Efficiency Submitted 4 different MOVs Submitted 3 different MOVs Submitted 2 different MOVs Submitted 1 MOV NO MOV submitted
4.Adjusted AIP

(Note: operational def of evaluation Timeliness

processes)
SUBTOTAL (KRA 1)

Page 3 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
KRA 2 MANAGING SCHOOL (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
OPERATIONS AND
RESOURCES
Strand 2.1 Records Management 1. Screenshot of updated and
validated EBEIS Consistently managed Frequently managed school Occasionally managed Rarely managed school
Quality school data as shown in the data as shown in the MOVs school data as shown in the data as shown in the MOVs No acceptable evidence
MOVs submitted submitted MOVs submitted submitted shown
2. LDM Readiness Assessment Result
3%
Managed school data and information
using technology, including ICT, to 3.LDM Readiness Action Plan Efficiency Submitted 4 MOVs Submitted 3 of 4 MOVs Submitted 2 of 4 MOVs Submitted 1 of 4 MOV No MOV submitted
ensure effective and efficient schools’
operations.
4.Screenshot of updated and Timeliness
validated LIS

Strand 2.2. Financial Management 1. Financial Liquidation

99% - 100% utilization of 90%-98% utilization of 75%-89% utilization of 74% and below utilization No liquidation report
Quality downloaded school fund downloaded school fund downloaded school fund of downloaded school fund submitted
Reports from June 2020 – June 2021 aligned to the AIP/BE-LCP aligned to the AIP/ BE-LCP aligned to the AIP/ BE-LCP aligned to the AIP/ BE-LCP

Managed finances adhering to 2. Certificate of No Unliquidated Cash (Monthly

policies, guidelines and issuances in Advances issued by the SOU-in- Rating from
allocation, procurement, disbursement charge/District Bookkeeper/Division June 2020-
and liquidation aligned to the school Accountant June 2021)
plan

3. Annual ImplementationPlan (AIP)

for 2020 and 2021

4. Approved BE-LCP Efficiency Submitted 5 of the Submitted 4 of the Submitted 3 of the Submitted 2 of the Submitted 1 of the
acceptable MOVs. acceptable MOVs. acceptable MOVs. acceptable MOVs. acceptable MOVs.
5. Annual Procurement Plan (APP) for
2020 and 2021
5%
Note:

*Newly-opened schools/Schools
with No MOOE downloaded fund
are required to secure certification
from the Division Accountant to be
automatically given a rating of 5)

Timeliness

*For Autonomous schools:

Page 4 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Timeliness
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

Submission of Budgetary and

Financial Reports (Quarterly and
Semi-annual)

Month Quality Average RPMS Rating for Quality Efficiency RPMS Rating for Efficiency
Rating
Jun-20 4
July 202 5
August 4 4.538 Outstanding ( 5 ) Submitted 5 MOVs Outstanding ( 5 )
Sep-20 5
Oct-20 5
Sample Computation only Nov-20 4
Dec-20 5
Jan-21 5
Feb-21 3
Mar-21 5
Apr-21 5
May-21 4
Jun-21 5
RPMS Rating Transmutation Table
Outstanding ( 5 ) 4.500-5.000
Very Satisfactory ( 4 ) 3.500-4.499
20% Satisfactory ( 3 ) 2.500-3.499
Unsatisfactory ( 2 ) 1.500-2.499
Poor ( 1 ) 1.000-1.499

1.School Inventory Report validated

Strand 2.3 School Facilities & by the District Physical Facilities
Equipment Coordinator/School Property Acquired, recorded,
Custodian. Acquired, recorded,
properly issued, utilized, properly Acquired, recorded, and Acquired and recorded
Quality and maintained needed needed school issued, and utilized properly issued needed needed school facilities and No evidence shown
school facilities and facilities and school facilities and equipment
equipment equipment equipment
2.AIP highlighting the facilities and
equipment to be maintained or
repaired.
Managed school facilities and
equipment in adherence to policies, Supporting MOVs
guidelines and issuances on
acquisition, recording, utilization, Any of the following:
repair and maintenance, storage, 75%-100% of the identified 50%-74% of the identified 25%-49% of the identified 24% and below of the
disposal and the like facilities and equipment facilities and equipment facilities and equipment identified facilities and No repair of the identified
1.Approved and Implemented 3% Efficiency were repaired and were repaired and were repaired and equipment were repaired facilities and equipment
Program of Works maintained. maintained. maintained. and maintained.

Page 5 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
3% Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

2. Liquidation Report highlighting the

Unified Accounts Code Structure
(UACS) Expense Account on Timeliness
repair/maintenance carried-out by the
school (Summary of disbursements)

Strand 2.4 Management of Staff

1. Consolidated Teachers 74% and below of the
Schedule/Assignment 100% of the teachers are 90-99% of the teachers are 75-89% of the teachers are teachers are assigned with
Quality assigned with teaching assigned with teaching assigned with teaching teaching loads and/with No evidence shown
loads and/with additional loads and/with additional loads and/with additional additional ancillary
ancillary assignments ancillary assignments ancillary assignments assignments
Managed staffing such as teaching 2. School Form 7 4%
load distribution and grade level and
subject area assignment in adherence
to laws, policies, guidelines and 3. Office Order (Ancillary assignment
issuances based on the needs of the of Teachers) Efficiency Submitted all 4 MOVs Submitted 3 of the 4 MOVs Submitted 2 of the 4 MOVs Submitted 1 of the 4 MOV No MOV submitted
school.
4. ACR of Faculty Meeting (Virtual or Timeliness
Face-to-Face)

Strand 2.6 Emerging Opportunities 1.LDM Readiness Assessment

and Challenges Results and

Gathered data, planned, Gathered data, planned and

LDM Readiness Action Plan implemented and monitored implemented and monitored Gathered data, planned and Gathered data and planned
Quality activities, with feedback, activities that address the implemented
address
activities that activities that address the
the needs of needs of learners, school No evidence shown
that address the needs of needs of learners, school learners, school personnel, personnel, and other
learners, school personnel, personnel, and other and other stakeholders stakeholders
and other stakeholders stakeholders
Managed emerging challenges and (highlighting activities that address the
opportunities to encourage equality needs of the learners, school
and equity in addressing the needs of personnel and other stakeholders)
learners, school personnel and other
stakeholders.

2.ACR/s on activities reflected on the

readiness action plan 5%

Efficiency Submitted 4 of the 4 MOVs Submitted 3 of the 4 MOVs Submitted 2 of the 4 MOVs Submitted 1 of the 4 MOV No MOV submitted
3.Adjusted M & E Plan highlighting the
changes/adjustments with attached
certification from the District Head

Page 6 of 24
 5%

TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION

Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

4.Consolidated feedback from the

learners, school personnel and other Timeliness
stakeholders

SUBTOTAL (KRA 2)
KRA 3 FOCUSING ON TEACHING AND LEARNING

Assisted, checked, Assisted, checked, and Assisted and checked

Strand 3.1 School-based Review, 1. LDM Technical Assistance Plan reviewed, and monitored reviewed any teachers’ any Assisted teachers’ any
Contextualization and highlighting contextualization Quality the utilization of any contextualized learning contextualized learning contextualized learning No evidence shown
Implementation of Standards contextualized learning resources resources resources
resources

2. Monthly School Instructional

Supervisory Plan and Report Contextualized any of the Contextualized any of the Contextualized any of the Contextualized any of the Contextualized any of the
(SISPAR) highlighting TA on following following following following following
Assisted teachers in the review, contextualization
contextualization, and implementation Efficiency
of learning standards to make the 8%
curriculum relevant for learners.

3. Observation Notes/PMCF with Learning resources in 7 – 8 Learning resources in 6 Learning resources in 5 Learning resources 3 - 4 Learning resources in 1 – 2
emphasis on COT Indicators 1 and 2 learning areas learning areas learning areas learning areas learning areas

4. Copies of contextualized learning

resources such as but not limited to
the following:
Lesson Plans/LAS for every learning Timeliness
area
Video/Audio lessons
Big/Small books
SIM
Note: MOVs 1, 2 & 3 shall be used to rate for Quality while Efficiency shall refer to MOV 4
Strand 3.2 Teaching Standards and Main MOV:
Pedagogies

Consolidated COT Ratings of Teachers’ average RPMS Teachers’ average RPMS Teachers’ average RPMS Teachers’ average RPMS Teachers’ average RPMS
Teachers (Proficient and Highly Quality rating for COT indicator #3 rating for COT indicator #3 rating for COT indicator #3 rating for COT indicator #3 rating for COT indicator #3
Proficient) is equivalent to 4.50-5.0 is equivalent to 3.500-4.499 is equivalent to 2.500-3.499 is equivalent to 1.500-2.499 is equivalent to 1.000-1.499
(Outstanding) (Very Satisfactory) (Satisfactory) (Unsatisfactory) (Poor)
Provided technical assistance to
teachers on teaching standards and
pedagogy across learning areas to Supporting MOVs:
improve teaching practice.
Any of the following documents
showing the TA provided
Efficiency Submitted Main MOV and 4 Submitted Main MOV and
any 3 of the acceptable
Submitted Main MOV and
any 2 of the acceptable
Submitted Main MOV and
any 1 of the acceptable No MOV submitted
8% of the acceptable MOVs. MOVs MOVs. MOV
1.Performance Monitoring Coaching
Form (PMCF)

Page 7 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
8%
Weight per
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

2.School Instructional Supervisory

Plan and Report (SISPAR)

Timeliness
3.Observation Notes

4.Reviewed and enhanced Lesson

Plans/LAS
Note: For efficiency, teachers who are/were on official leave (paternity, maternity and medical-related) shall be excluded in calculating the number of teachers.
Main MOVs:
1. Report on Promotion or SF5
95%-100% of the learners 85%-94% of the learners 75%-84% of the learners 74% and below of the
2.School Form 6-Summarized Report Quality were promoted to the next were promoted to the next were promoted to the next learners were promoted to No evidence shown
Strand 3.4 Learner Achievement higher grade level. higher grade level higher grade level the next higher grade level
and Other Performance Indicators on Promotion & Learning Progress
and Achievement

Supporting MOVs:

1.Copy/ies of Individual Monitoring Submitted Main MOVs and Submitted Main MOVs and Submitted Main MOVs and Submitted Main MOV and
Plans Efficiency 4 of the different listed any 3 of the different listed any 2 of the different listed any 1 of the different listed No MOV submitted
supporting MOVs supporting MOVs supporting MOVs supporting MOVs
2.Copy/ies of ACR on interventions
conducted 8%
Utilized learning outcomes in
developing data-based interventions
to maintain learner-achievement and
attain other performance indicators. 3.Copy/ies of LAC Report/Minutes of
Meeting initiated by the SH

4.Parents’ Agreement with the

Teacher on the intervention Timeliness
conducted

5. Complete ACRs on the conduct of

Portfolio Day

(1st-4th Qtr.)

Page 8 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

LDM Technical Assistance Plan Developed and Developed and Developed and Developed and
highlighting learners’ assessment implemented TA plan to implemented TA plan to implemented TA plan to implemented TA plan to
Strand 3.5 Learning Assessment strategies with proof of collaborative Quality teachers on the use of 4 teachers on the use of 3 teachers on the use of 2 teachers on the use of 1 No evidence shown
review on the alignment of the varied assessment varied assessment varied assessment assessment strategy
assessment with the curriculum strategies strategies strategies

· Formative test attached to

WHLP/LAS
Efficiency
Provided technical assistance to 6%
teachers in using learning assessment · Performance Assessment
tools, strategies, and results
consistent with curriculum · Diagnostic test
requirements to ensure accountability · Rubrics
in achieving higher learning
outcomes. · Checklist Timeliness

· Portfolio of learners

SUBTOTAL (KRA 3)
KRA 4 DEVELOPING SELF & OTHERS

Implemented 95-100% of Implemented 85%-94% of Implemented 75% -84% of below Implemented 74% and
Strand 4.2 Professional Reflection 1. LAC Form 3 Quality the activities in the LAC the activities in the LAC the activities in the LAC of the activities in the No evidence shown
and Learning Plan with self-reflections Plan with self-reflections Plan with self-reflections LAC Plan with self-
reflections
3%
2. LAC Plan Efficiency
Apply professional reflection and
learning to improve one’s practice.
3. ACR of LAC Sessions Conducted Timeliness

Strand 4.3 Professional Networks Any of the following MOVs with proof
of implementation**:

1.Certificate of completion in a
course/Training Participated in Participated in Area/District
International/National/Regio professional network/activity Participated in school Participated in any
Participate in professional networks nal/Division professional that requires output and professional network/activity professional network/activity
to upgrade knowledge and skills and network/activity that proof of implementation that requires output to share that does not require output No acceptable evidence
to enhance practice 2.Certificate of participation in a Quality requires output and proof of within the department or knowledge and to enhance to share knowledge and to
webinar, retooling, upskilling, and implementation within the grade level to share enhance practice as was shown
other training/seminar/workshop school to share knowledge knowledge and to enhance practice as evidenced by evidenced by the submitted
and to enhance practice as practice as evidenced by the submitted MOV MOV
evidenced by the submitted the submitted MOV
MOV
4%
3.Certificate of recognition for being a
speaker/writer/facilitator/organizer of a
webinar or workshop

Page 9 of 24
 4%
TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

4.Chairmanship of any committee for

a school/division/regional/national Efficiency
programs and or projects/activities

5.Any proof of participation to a Timeliness

benchmarking activity

** “Proof of implementation” can be in the form of implemented action plan, lesson plan executed in class, application project, etc.

Strand 4.4 Performance 1. Summary of

Management
Teachers’ IPCR Implemented the Implemented the Implemented the Implemented the
Implemented the performance Ratings duly certified by the performance management performance management performance management performance management
management system with a team to Quality system with 4 acceptable system with 3 acceptable system with 2 acceptable system with 1 acceptable No evidence shown
School Head/District Head
support the career advancement of MOVs MOVs MOVs MOV
school personnel, and to improve 2. Comparative
office performance Assessment Result
(CAR) finalized
by the school
screening
committee 4% Efficiency
3.Compilation of Teachers IPCRF Part
4

4.List of trainings attended by the

teachers 20%

5.List of Promoted personnel duly

certified by the Division AO Timeliness

6. List of Teachers enrolled in

Graduate school
Strand 4.5 Learning and
Development of School Personnel MOVs:

1.Needs-Analysis Report based on

either of the following: four (4) identified priority three (3) identified priority two (2) of the identified one (1) the identified priority
Implemented professional Quality needs of the school needs of the school priority needs of the school needs of the school No evidence shown
development initiatives to enhance personnel were addressed personnel were addressed personnel were addressed personnel were addressed
strengths and address performance
gaps among school personnel a. Teachers’ Prof. Development
Plan(Part IV of the IPCRF)

4%

Page 10 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS
Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor RESULTS RATING SCORE
KRA QET Q E T Total Ave.
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
b. Electronic Self Assessment Tool (e-
SAT)
Conducted 4 of any listed Conducted 3 of any listed Conducted 2 of any listed Conducted 1 of any listed
learning modalities with learning modalities with learning modalities with learning modalities with
2.Conduct of any of the following
learning modalities: 4% Efficiency acceptable MOVs acceptable MOVs acceptable MOVs acceptable MOVs No MOV submitted
addressing the four priority addressing the three priority addressing the two priority addressing the one priority
needs needs needs need
a. Formal Learning (INSET)
b. Learning Action Cell (LAC)
c. Relationship and Discussion-Based 20%
Learning (RDL)
e.g. Coaching & Mentoring

d. Job-embedded Learning (JEL) Timeliness

e.g. Job shadowing, committee,

special projects

Note: Priority Needs-refers to teachers’ common needs aligned to the new normal education
SUBTOTAL (KRA 4)
KRA 5 BUILDING CONNECTIONS
Main MOVs:
Strand 5.5 Community Engagement
Brigada Eskwela 95%-100% Brigada 85%-94% Brigada Eskwela 75%- 84% Brigada Eskwela 74% and below Brigada
Quality Eskwela (BE) rating (BE) rating (BE) rating Eskwela (BE) rating No evidence shown
District (Elementary & Secondary)
Initiated partnerships with the Level Validation Result
community, such as parents, alumni,
authorities, industries and other
stakeholders, to strengthen support Supporting MOVs: 10% 10% Efficiency Main MOV supported with 4 Main MOV supported with 3 Main MOV supported with 2 Main MOV supported with 1 No MOV submitted
for learner development, as well as 1.Brigada Eskwela of the listed MOVs of the listed MOVs of the listed MOVs of the listed MOVs
school and community improvement. Form 7
2.Copy of Deed of Donation
3. Sample of MOA/MOU
Timeliness
4.BE Form 4 (Records of Attendance)
5.BE-LCP
SUBTOTAL (KRA 4)

*To get the score, the rating is multiplied by the weight assigned. 100% OVERALL RATING FOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Page 11 of 24
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
SCHOOLS DIVISION OF LEYTE
Government Center, Candahug, Palo, Leyte

OFFICE PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT AND REVIEW FORM (OPCRF)

Name of Employee : Name of Rater : HENRIETTA T. MANAGBANAG EdD, CESO VI
Position : Position : Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
Rating Period : CY 2023 Date of Review :
Name of School :
TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 1 LEADING STRATEGICALLY
1. Approved 2022 AIP and APP with 95.00-100% average rating 90.00-94.99% average 85.00-89.99% average Below 85.00% average No evidence shown
attached PRS signed Summary of of the 3 appriased strategic rating of the 3 appriased rating of the 3 appriased rating of the 3 appriased
Strand 1.2 School Planning & Ratings for AIP and APP appriasal. plans (SIP, AIP, APP). strategic plans (SIP, AIP, strategic plans (SIP, AIP, strategic plans (SIP, AIP, 96.5% average rating of the 3
Implementation Quality APP). APP). APP).
appriased strategic plans
(SIP, AIP, APP).

95%-100% implementation 85%-94% implementation of 75%-84% implementation of 74% and below No evidence shown
2. M & E Tool (QSAT) showing physical of PPAs as indicated in SIP/ PPAs as indicated in PPAs as indicated SIP/AIP implementation of PPAs as
and financial accomplishments vs. AIP SIP/AIP indicated in SIP/ AIP
5% Efficiency 95% implementation of PPAs 5 5 5 5 0.25
Objective 1: Engaged the school targets in the SIP- AIP for 4 quarters as indicated in SIP/ AIP
community in the development and with supplemental AIPs if needed.
implementation of school plans
aligned with institutional goals and
policies. On time submission of Submitted all plans at Submitted all plans at Submitted all plans at No evidence shown Submitted on time
SIP, AIP, APP least within one week least within two weeks least three or more
3. Rating for timeliness in the AIP/APP Timeliness after the deadline after the deadline weeks after the deadline
Summary of Ratings

20%

Page 12 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
85-100% of targeted 70- 84.99 % of targeted 55 to 69.99% of the Below 55% of targeted No acceptable evidence
1. SDO or district approved improvement in improvement in targeted improvement in improvement in was shown.
innovation/intervention crafted out of performance was achieved performance was achieved perfromance was achieved performance was achieved
Strand 1.4 Research and Innovation school-based research or data analysis 53% of targeted improvement
report leading to improved performance Quality in performance was achieved
as shown in SMEA or other related
reports.

95-100% of the approved 90-94.99% of the approved 85-89.99% of the approved 84.99% or below of the No evidence shown
2. SDO or district approved innovation/intervention innovation/intervention innovation/intervention approved
Implementation Plan (as part of the activities were carried out activities were carried out activities were carried out innovation/intervention
5% Efficiency activities were carried out 84% or below of the approved 2 2 2 2 0.1
Objective 2: Collaborated with school innovation/intervention proposal) innovation/intervention
activities were carried out
personnel in the conduct of research supported with Activity Accoplishment
and utilization of findings in facilitating Reports/ACRs
data-driven and evidence-based
innovations to improve school 3. School summary report of 95-100% of the approved 90-94.99% of the approved 85-89.99% of the approved 84.99% or below of the No evidence shown
performance. innovation/intervention activities activities were carried out innovation/intervention innovation/intervention approved
conducted reflecting the propsed 20% on time or as scheduled activities were carried out activities were carried out innovation/intervention 80% of the approved
schedule of conduct and the actual Timeliness as scheduled as scheduled activities were carried out activities were carried out
dates of conduct. as scheduled on time or as scheduled

Strand 1.6 Learner's Voice 1. Any school report on refelcting 95-100% targeted 90-94.99% targeted 85-89.99% targeted 84.99% or below of targeted No evidence shown
targeted improvements (e.g. SMEA, improvements were improvements were improvements were improvements were
SRC, SGC/ PTA/SSG Resolutions, etc.) achieved based on school achieved based on school achieved based on school achieved based on school
Objective 3- Utilized learners' voice based on issues/concerns that were reports (SMEA, SRC, etc.) reports (SMEA, SRC etc.) reports (SMEA, SRC etc.) reports (SMEA, SRC etc.) 96% targeted improvements
such us such as feelings, views and or drawn out from utiizing learners' voice Quality were achieved based on
opinions to inform policy and decision with proof of conduct surveys/ school reports (SMEA, SRC
etc.)
making towards school improvement consultations conducted.

5% 5 5 5 0.25
95-100% or targeted 90-94.99% of targeted 85-89.99% of targeted 84.99% or below of targeted No evidence shown
2. Targeted activites for utilizing activities were carried out activities were carried out activities were carried out activities were carried out
learners' voice (as stipulated in AIP or evidenced by ACRs evidenced by ACRs evidenced by ACRs evidenced by ACRs.
95% of targeted activities
supplemental AIP) to inform policy and Efficiency were carried out evidenced by
ACRs
decision making towards school
improvements with ACRs.

1. Two or more SMEA/QSAT/ or other M 85-100% improvement in a 70-84.99% improvement in 55-74.99% improvement in Below 55% improvement in No evidence shown
Strand 1.7 Monitoring & Evaluation and E reports (comparative) reflecting particular indicator related a particular indicator related a particular indicator related a particular indicator related 92% improvement in a
Processes and Tools the improvement in learners' Quality to learners' performance. to learners performance. to learners performance. to learners performance. particular indicator related to
learners performance in 4
performance. QSAT

2. Activity Completion Reports (ACRs) 90-100% of targeted 80-89.99% of targeted 70-79.99% of targeted Below 70% of targeted No evidence shown
reflecting the use of M and E tools/ activities crafted utilizing M activities crafted utilizing M activities crafted utilizing M activities crafted utilizing M
proceeses used for any activity leading 5% and E tools and processes, and E tools and processes, and E tools and processes, and E tools and processes, 5 4 4.5 0.225
Objective 4: Utilized available
monitoring and evaluation processes to improvement of learners' performance as reflected in as reflected in as reflected in as reflected in 85% of targeted activities
crafted utilizing M and E tools
and tools to promote learner Efficiency AIP/Supplemetal AIP, were AIP/Supplemetal AIP, were AIP/Supplemetal AIP, were AIP/Supplemetal AIP, were and processes, as reflected in
achievement. carried out carried out carried out carried out AIP/Supplemetal AIP, were
carried out

SUBTOTAL (KRA 1) 0.825

Page 13 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 2 MANAGING SCHOOL OPERATIONS AND RESOURCES
Screenshot of EBEIS/BEIS and NSBI dashboards supported Uploaded EBEIS/BEIS and NSBI reports Uploaded EBEIS/BEIS and NSBI reports Uploaded EBEIS/BEIS and NSBI with 90- Uploaded EBEIS/BEIS and NSBI with No uploading of any or both NSBI and
with printed validated copies of the said reports signed by with 100% accuracy of data entries with 95-99.99% accuracy of data entries 94.99% accuracy of data entries 89.99% and below accuracy of data EBEIS/BEIS
District EMIS. entries
Strand 2.1 Records Management 100%

Screenshot of LIS dashboard signed by District EMIS Finalized LIS EoSY with no pending Finalized EoSY with 1-5 pending issues or Finalized EoSY with 6-10 pending issues Finalized EoSY with 11 or more pending Unfinalized EoSY
Quality issues or concerns (except for CO concerns (except for CO resolution) or concerns (except for CO Resolution) issues or concerns (except for CO
resolution) resolution) Finalized

Latest copy of validated SF5 and SF 6 reports 100% of data in SF 5 and 6 are accurate 95-99.99% of data in SF 5 and 6 are 90-94.99% of data in SF 5 and 6 are Below 90% data in SF 5 and 6 are No evidence shown
accurate accurate accurate
100%

Screehot of Crucial Resources Report (PRS Google Form) No data uploading in crucial
signed by District EMIS resources report
100%
Encoded 100% of required data in the Encoded 95-99.99% of required data Encoded 90-94.44% of required data Encoded below 90% of required data
Crucial Resources Report in the Crucial Resources Report in the Crucial Resources Report in the Crucial Resources Report
QSAT/PROMEDS submitted to District/Area Focal validated Submiited 4 QSAT/Promeds to District/ Submitted 3 QSAT/Promeds to Submitted 2 QSAT/Promeds to district/ Submiited 1 QSAT/Promeds to district/ No submission of QSAT and Promodes to
by PSDS/Area Focal for Secondary Schools Area Focal district/area focal area focal area focal area focal
Submitted

Screenshot of DPDS Dashboard Uploaded accurate data in 4 quarters in Uplaoded accurate data in at least 3 Uploaded accurate data in at least 2 Uploaded accurate data in at least 1 No uploading of data in DPDS in any
DPDS quarters in DPDS quarters in DPDS quarter in DPDS quarters
4 quarter DPDS

LIS dashboard signed by District EMIS 10% 5 4.5 4.75 0.475

Objective 1: Managed school data
and information using technology, No pending enrolment in LIS due to Presence 1-5 pending enrolment in Presence 6-10 pending enrolment in Presence 11-15 pending enrolment in Presence 16 or more pending No Pending
including ICT, to ensure effective and enrolment with gap, enrolment of LIS due to enrolment with gap, LIS due to enrolment with gap, LIS due to enrolment with gap, enrolment in LIS due to enrolment
efficient schools’ operations. inelligible, LRN approval if the learner
was from the same school for
enrolement of inelligible, LRN
approval if the learner was from the
enrolement of inelligible, LRN
approval if the learner was from the
enrolement of inelligible, LRN
approval if the learner was from the
with gap, enrolement of inelligible,
LRN approval if the learner was from
previous SY same school for previous SY same school for previous SY same school for previous SY the same school for previous SY
Screenshot of uploaded IPCRs (in PRS Google Link) Efficiency Uploaded 100% of IPCRs of school No uploading of IPCRs
vaidated by PRS Staff personnel with Part IV
NoMOV
Uploaded 95-99.99% of IPCRs of Uploaded 90-94.99% of IPCRs of Uploaded below 89.99% of IPCRs of
school personnel with Part IV school personnel with Part IV school personnel with Part IV
LIS dashboard No pending request for confirmation of Presence of 1-5 pending requests for Presence of 6-10 pending requests for Presence of 11- 20 pending requests for Presence of 20 or more pending requests
transfers as originating school confirmation of transfers as originating confirmation of transfers as originating confirmation of transfers as origonating for confirmation of transfers as originating
school school school school
No Pending

Latest SF 1 (School Register) 100% generation of SF1 95-99.99% of SF 1 from LIS 90-94.99% of SF 1 from LIS 85-84.99% of SF 1 from LIS 84.99% and below SF 1 generation from
LIS
from LIS 100%
30%
Compilation of SF 2 from Jan. to Dec. 100% complete SF2 reports 90-99.99% complete SF2 reports 80-89.99% complete SF2 reports 70-79.99% complete SF2 reports Below 70% complete SF 2 reports
100%

Screenshot of uploaded SF4 (per quarter) signed District Succesul uploading of SF4 for 4 quatrers Succesul uploading of SF4 for 3 quatrers Succesul uploading of SF4 for 2 quatrers Succesul uploading of SF4 for 1 quatrer No uoploading of SF 4
EMIS Uploading 4 quarters

Strand 2.2. Financial Management SMEA reports showing financial

90-100% of financial targets are achieved 80-89.99% of financial targets are 70-79.99% of financial targets are Below 70% of financial targets are 85% of financial targets are
Objective 2: Managed finances accomplishments vs. targets compared Quality as shown in a validated SMEA report. achieved as shown in a validated SMEA achieved as shown in a validated SMEA achieved as shown in a validated SMEA No evidence shown achieved as shown in a
validated SMEA report.
adhering to policies, guidelines and to AIP/Supplemental AIP
issuances in allocation, procurement,
disbursement and liquidation aligned
to the school plan 90-100% of allocated funds were
downloaded
80-89.99% of allocated funds were
downloaded
70-79% of allocated funds were
downloaded
70-79% of allocated funds were
downloaded
Bellow 70% of allocate funds were
downloaded
100% of allocated funds were
downloaded
Liquidation Reports duly received by 15% 4 5 4 4.33333 0.65
SDO Finance Staff Efficiency
100% of downloaded funds were 95-99.99% of downloaded funds were 90-94.99% of downloaded funds were 85-89.99% of downloaded funds were Below 85% of downloaded funds were
liquidated. liquidated. liquidated. liquidated liquidated 100% of downloaded funds
were liquidated.

4 quarters of liquidation reprots were 3 quarters of liquidation reports were 2 quarters of liquidation reprots were 1 quarter liquidation report was submitted No liquidation report was submitted on
submitted on time. submitted on time. submitted on time. on time time 3 quarters of liquidation
Received copies of Liquidation Reports Timeliness reprots were submitted on
time.

Page 14 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
100% of the received, procured, 90-99.99% of the received, 80-89.99% of the received, 70-79.99% of the received, Below 70% of the received,
2.3 School Facilities & Equipment and donated facilities,equipment procured, and donated procured, and donated procured, and donated procured, and donated
etc. were properly received, facilities,equipment etc. were facilities,equipment etc. were facilities,equipment etc. were facilities,equipment etc. were
recorded and maintained. properly received, recorded and properly received, recorded and properly received, recorded and properly received, recorded and
Updated and validated School Inventory maintained. maintained. maintained. maintained.
Objective 3: Managed school Reports by the District/School Property
facilities and equipment in Custodian (to include all MOOE
100% of the received,
purchased equipment, donations, procured, and donated
adherence to policies, PTA/homeroom class projects, SEF, and 2% Efficiency facilities,equipment etc. were 5 5 0.1
guidelines and issuances on deliveries from central office and other properly received, recorded
and maintained.
acquisition, recording, sources) supported by accomplished
utilization, repair and Inspection and Acceptance Forms, Deed
maintenance, storage, disposal of Donation and other similar forms.
and the likes

100% of the teachers are 90-99.99% of the teachers are 80-89.99% of the teachers are Below 80% of the teachers are No evidence shown
2.4 Management of staff assigned with teaching loads assigned with teaching loads assigned with teaching loads assigned with teaching loads
1. SF 7 duly noted/signed by PSDS or meeting minimun loading meeting minimun loading meeting minimun loading meeting minimun loading
EPSvr with date of submission with requirments (to include in the requirments (to include in the requirments (to include in the requirments (to include in the
consolidated class program by Key count the additional ancillary count the additional ancillary count the additional ancillary count the additional ancillary
assignments as part of the load) assignments as part of the load) assignments as part of the load) assignments as part of the load) 100% of the teachers are
Stage(s) and duly signed class and assigned with teaching loads
meeting minimun loading
teachers' programs (with date of Quality requirments (to include in the
submissions) count the additional ancillary
assignments as part of the
load)
Objective 4: Managed staffing such as
teaching load distribution and grade 1% 5 5 5 0.05
level and subject area assignment in
adherence to laws, policies,
guidelines and issuances based on
the needs of the school SF 7, Class and teacher SF 7, Class and teacher SF 7, Class and teacher SF 7, Class and teacher No evidence shown
2. Special/Office Order for ancillary programs are submitted to the programs are submitted to the programs are submitted to the programs are submitted to the
assignments of teachers District Office before the opening District Office during the opening District Office at least 1-2 weeks District Office at 3 weeks or more SF 7, Class and teacher
30% of classes. of classes. after the opening of classes. after the opening of classes. programs are submitted to the
Timeliness District Office before the
opening of classes.

90-100% of emerging challenges 80-89.99% of emerging 70-79.99% of emerging Below 70% of emerging No evidence shown
2.6 Emerging Opportunities and were addressed supported by challenges were addressed challenges were addressed challenges were addressed
Challenges 1. ACR on addressed Issues and ACR supported by ACR supported by ACR supported by ACR
corners (per process owner) per quarter 70-79.99% of emerging
from SMEA and other school reports Efficiency challenges were addressed
supported by ACR
with support attachements (STAPP,
Objective 5: Managed emerging STAPE)
challenges and opportunities to 2% 3 3 3 0.06
encourage equality in addressing 90-100% of targeted activities in 80-89.99% of targeted activities 70-79.99% of targeted activities Below 70% of targeted activities No evidence shown
the needs of learners, school Schedule of Activities related to adressing issues and challenges in adressing issues and in adressing issues and in adressing issues and 70-79.99% of targeted
personnel and other stakeholders addressing emerging issues and Timeliness were done as scheduled challenges were done as challenges were done as challenges were done as activities in adressing issues
and challenges were done as
scheduled scheduled scheduled
concerns scheduled

SUBTOTAL (KRA 2) 1.335

Page 15 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 3 FOCUSING ON TEACHING AND LEARNING
95-100% of activities per 90-94.99% of activities per 85-.89.99% of activities per Below 85% of activities per No evidence shown
month in the instructional month in the instructional month in the instructional month in the instructional
supervisory plan were supervisory plan were supervisory plan were supervisory plan were
carried out as reflected in carried out as reflected in carried out as reflected in carried out as reflected in 92% of activities per month in
Strand 3.1 School-based Review, School Instructional Supervisory Plan SISAR signed by the PSDS SISAR signed by the PSDS SISAR, signed PSDS SISAR signed by PSDS the instructional supervisory
supported by COT or other supported by COT or other supported by COT or other supported by COT or other plan were carried out as
Contextualization and and Reports, COT or other teacher reflected in SISAR signed by
Implementation of Standards observation tools teaching observation tools teaching observation tools teaching observation tools teaching observation tools the PSDS supported by COT
or other teaching observation
tools

Provided assistance to Provided assistance to 95- Provided assistance to 90- Provided assistance to No evidence shown
100% of identified teachers 99.99% of identified 94.99% of identified 89.99% of identified
on contextualization teachers on teachers on teachers on
supported by any of the contextualization supported contextualization supported contextualization supported
List of teachers needing technical following MOVs ACRs on by any of the following by any of the following by any of the following Provided assistance to 96%
of identified teachers on
assistance on contextualization with LAC Session/INSET, MOVs ACRs on LAC MOVs ACRs on LAC MOVs ACRs on LAC contextualization supported
ACR or any other document serving as PMCF, other TA reports Session/INSET, PMCF, Session/INSET, PMCF, Session/INSET, PMCF, by any of the following MOVs
ACRs on LAC
proof of the assistance provided. other TA reports other TA reports other TA reports Session/INSET, PMCF, other
TA reports

10% Efficiency Provided assistance to Provided assistance to 95- Provided assistance to 90- Provided assistance to No evidence shown 4 4 0.4
100% teachers/dept. heads 99.99% teachers/dept. 94.99% teachers/dept. 89.99% and below
for curriculum heads for curriculum heads for curriculum teachers/dept. heads for
Any document serving as proof for the implementation evidenced implementation evidenced implementation evidenced curriculum implementation
Objective 1: Assisted teachers in the assistance provided to teachers for the by checked and monitored by checked and monitored by checked and monitored evidenced by checked and Provided assistance to 96%
teachers/dept. heads for
review, contextualization, and implementation of learning standards lessons plans, LCDs or LAC lessons plans, LCDs or LAC lessons plans, LCDs or LAC monitored lessons plans, curriculum implementation
implementation of learning standards (e.g. PMCF, TA reports, ACRs) sessions conducted related sessions conducted related sessions conducted related LCDs or LAC sessions evidenced by checked and
monitored lessons plans,
to make the curriculum relevant for supported by checklist of Lesson Plans to curriculum implemented to curriculum implemented to curriculum implemented conducted related to LCDs or LAC sessions
learners. and LCDs from January up to curriculum implemented conducted related to
curriculum implemented
December. 30%

Conducted at least 1 Conducted at least 1 Conducted at least 1 Conducted at least 1 No evidence shown
curriculum review and curriculum review or had curriculum review or had curriculum review or had
provided technical not conducted any activity not conducted any activity not conducted any activity
assistance to 90-100% of for curriculum review and for curriculum review and for curriculum review and
Conducted at least 1
identified teachers provided technical provided technical provided technical curriculum review or had not
ACR or other relevant documents on the assistance to 80-89.99% of assistance to 70-79.99% of assistance to below 70% of conducted any activity for
conduct of curriculum review or related identified teachers identified teachers identified teachers curriculum review and
provided technical assistance
activities to 80-89.99% of identified
teachers

Strand 3.2 Teaching Standards and Average ratings for content knowledge
Pedagogies and pedagogy on teachers needing Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for
assistance/ TA for the said indicator COT indicator #1 is COT indicator #1 is COT indicator #1 is COT indicator #1 is Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for
Quality equivalent to 4.50-5.0 equivalent to 3.500-4.499 equivalent to 2.500-3.499 equivalent to 1.500-2.499 COT indicator #1 is COT indicator #1 is
equivalent to 3.500-4.499
(Outstanding) of identified (Very Satisfactory) of (Satisfactory) of identified (Unsatisfactory)of identified equivalent to 1.000-1.499 (Very Satisfactory) of
teachers identified teachers teachers teachers (Poor) of identified teachers identified teachers

Objective 2: Provided technical List of teachers needing TA on content 90-100% of identified 80-89.99% of identified 70-79.99% of identified Below 70% of identified No evidence shown
assistance to teachers on teaching knowledge and pedgogy ( target vs. 10% teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on 4 4 4 0.4
standards and pedagogy across accomplishment) supported by COT content knowledge and content knowledge and content knowledge and content knowledge and
learning areas to improve teaching PMCF or other relevant documents. pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA
practice. Efficiency 88% of identified teachers needing TA on content knowledge and pedagogy were provided TA

Page 16 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
Any M and E report showing the 90%-100% of the targeted 80%-89% of the targeted 70%-79% of the targeted 69% and below of the No evidence shown
improved learners' performance as an learners met learning learners met learning learners met learning targeted learners met
Strand 3.4 Learner Achievement outcome for the implementation of the expectations as a result of expectations as a result of expectations as a result of learning expectations as a
and Other Performance Indicators data-based interventions. the implemented data- the implemented data- the implemented data- result of the implemented
based intervention based intervention based intervention data-based intervention 95% of the targeted learners
met learning expectations as
5% Efficiency a result of the implemented 5 5 0.25
Objective 3: Utilized learning data-based intervention
outcomes in developing data-based
interventions to maintain learner-
achievement and attain other
performance indicators.
Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for Average RPMS rating for Teachers’ average RPMS Teachers’ average RPMS
COT indicator on learning COT indicator on learning COT indicator on learning rating for COT indicator on rating for COT indicator on
assessment is equivalent to assessment is equivalent to assessment is equivalent to learning assessment is learning assessment is
4.50-5.0 (Outstanding) for 3.500-4.499 (Very 2.500-3.499 (Satisfactory) equivalent to 1.500-2.499 equivalent to 1.000-1.499
Strand 3.5 Learning Assessment identified teachers Satisfactory) for identified for identified teachers (Unsatisfactory) for (Poor) for identified
PMCF/Superviosry Reports or other TA teachers identified teachers teachers Average RPMS rating for
reports (STAPP and STAPPE) COT indicator on learning
supported by COT with summary of 30% Quality assessment is equivalent to
2.500-4.499 (Very
ratings of identified teachers needing TA Satisfactory) for identified
teachers
on learning assessment.

5% 3 3 3 0.15
Objective 4: Provided technical List of teachers needing TA on learning 90-100% of identified 80-89.99% of identified 70-79.99% of identified Below 70% of identified No evidence shown
assistance to teachers in using assessment (target vs. teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on teachers needing TA on
learning assessment tools, strategies, accomplishment) supported by COT, content knowledge and content knowledge and content knowledge and content knowledge and
and results consistent with curriculum PMCF or other relevant tools. pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA pedagogy were provided TA
requirements to ensure accountability
in achieving higher learning 77% of identified teachers
needing TA on content
outcomes. Efficiency knowledge and pedagogy
were provided TA

SUBTOTAL (KRA 3) 1.2

Page 17 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 4 DEVELOPING SELF & OTHERS

Strand 4.2 Professional Reflection Summary of Teacher's Ratings of the

PPST indicators requiring Teacher's Quality Average TRF Rating 4.2-5.0 Average TRF Rating 3.4- Average TRF Rating 3.39- Average TRF Rating2.59- Average TRF Rating is 1.79 Average TRF Rating 4
and Learning Reflection Form (TRF) 4.19 2.6 1.8 or below

Objective 1:Apply professional 2% 90%-100% of teachers 89%-80% of teachers 79%-60% of teachers 59-%-40% of teachers Below 39% of teachers 4 5 4.5 0.09
reflection and learning to improve accomplished TRF accomplished TRF accomplished TRF accomplished TRF accomplishedTRF
one’s practice. Report on Teachers Accomplishment of Efficiency
90-100% of teachers
accomplished TRF
Reflection Form

Strand 4.3 Professional Networks

Summary of professional networks or 90%-100% of teachers, 89%-80% of teachers 79%-60% of teachers 59%-40% of teachers 39% or below of teachers
activities (e.g. attendance to trainings non teaching and SH participated in the participated in the participated in the participated in the
outside the school offered by other level participated in the profesional netwroks or profesional netwroks or profesional netwroks or profesional netwroks or
Objective 2:Participate in professional of governance in DepEd, or other 3% Efficiency profesional netwroks or activites to upgrade activites to upgrade activites to upgrade activites to upgrade 5 5 0.15
networks to upgrade knowledge and agencies) participated by teachers, non activites to upgrade knowledge and skills to knowledge and skills to knowledge and skills to knowledge and skills to
skills and to enhance practice teaching and the SH supported by knowledge and skills to enhance practice enhance practice enhance practice enhance practice
certificates of participation/appearance. enhance practice

90-100% of teachers, non teaching and SH participated in the profesional netwroks or activites to upgrade knowledge and skills to enhance practice
15% 90-100% of targeted 80-89.99% of targeted 70-79.99% of targeted Below 70% of targeted No evidence shown
List of targeted teachers improving teachers are improving teachers improving teachers improving teachers improving
performance evidenced by increased performance evidenced by performance evidenced by performance evidenced by performance evidenced by
Strand 4.4 Performance rating in IPCR
Management increased rating in IPCR increased rating in IPCR increased rating in IPCR increased rating in IPCR
PHASE 1 MOVs Agreed indicators and targets for IPCR and 90-100% of targeted teachers
OPCR improving performance
Quality evidenced by increased rating
Memo and ACR on the conduct of performance in IPCR
planning/target setting
PHASE II MOVs
PMCF

Conduct of Mid-Year Performance Review

5% 5 3 3 3.66667 0.183333333
PHASE 3 MOVs
Objective 3:Implemented the
performance management system Signed IPCRF (Parts I to IV) with Memo and ACR on Implemented the Implemented the Implemented the Implemented the
Implemented the performance
with a team to support the career Performance Review performance management performance management performance management performance management management system with 2
advancement of school personnel, Efficiency system with 4 complete and system with 3 complete and system with 2 complete and system with 1 complete and No evidence shown complete and acceptable
MOVs from each of the
and to improve office performance acceptable MOVs from acceptable MOVs from acceptable MOVs from acceptable MOVs from RPMS Phase
PHASE IV MOVs each of the RPMS Phase each of the RPMS Phase each of the RPMS Phase each of the RPMS Phase

Memo and ACR on the conduct of awards &

Timeliness Conducted all activities on Conducted 90-99.99% of
the RPMS activities as
Conducted 80-89.99% of
the RPMS activities as
Conducted 79% or below of
RPMS activities as No evidence shown Conducted 80-89% all
recognition actviities/ developmental planning time/or as scheduled scheduled scheduled scheduled
activities as scheduled

90-100% of conducted L 80-89% of conducted L and 70-79% of conducted L and Below 70% of conducted L No evidence shown
Strand 4.5 Learning and Summary of evalautions (QAME) of the and D activities met QAME D activities met QAME D activities met QAME and D activities met QAME 70-79% of conducted L and D
Development of School Personnel implemented L and D activities (LAC, Quality standards standards standards standards activities met QAME
standards
INSET, etc.) in school

Reports on the targeted L and D 90-100% of targeted L and 80-89.99% of targeted L 70-79.99% of targeted L Below 70% of targeted L No evidence shown
activities conducted (target vs D activities were conducted and D activities were and D activities were and D activities were 70-79% of targeted L and D
Objective 4:Implemented professional accomplishment- as reflected in 15% 5% Efficiency conducted conducted conducted activities were conducted 5 3 3 3.66667 0.183333333
development initiatives to enhance AIP/Supplemental AIP)
strengths and address performance 90-100% of targeted L and 80-89.99% of targeted L 70-79.99% of targeted L Below 70% of targeted L No evidence shown
gaps among school personnel D activities were conducted and D activities were and D activities were and D activities were
ACR of L and D activities matched with Timeliness on time conducted on time conducted on time conducted were conducted 70-79% of targeted L and D
activities were conducted on
AIP (targets) on time. time

SUBTOTAL (KRA 4) 0.606666667

Page 18 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
KRA 5 BUILDING CONNECTIONS
Had facilitated sigining of at Had facilitated sigining of at Had facilitated sigining of at Had facilitated sigining of at No evidence shown
Strand 5.5 Community Engagement least 4 or more MOA/MOUs least 3 MOA/MOUs or least 2 MOA/MOUs or least 1 MOA/MOUs or
or similar documents for similar documents for similar documents for similar documents for
partnerships partnerships partnerships partnerships

Objective 1: Initiated partnerships with

the community, such as parents, MOA/MOUs or similar documents Had facilitated sigining
alumni, authorities, industries and highlighting partnerships 1% 1% Efficiency 5MOA/MOUs or similar 5 5 0.05
documents for partnerships
other stakeholders, to strengthen initiated/strengthened.
support for learner development, as
well as school and community
improvement.

SUBTOTAL (KRA 5) 0.05

KRA 6 UNIT PERFORMANCE
Objective 1 Any proof of attendance to required 95%-100% of the required 90%-94% of the required 85%-89% of the required 85% and below of the required No evidence shown
meetings/conferences, other office meetings/conferences/ COPs meetings/conferences/ COPs meetings/conferences/ COPs meetings/conferences/
related transactions, and ACRs or were attended were attended were attended COPswere attended
Attendance to orientation activities, Project Implementaion Review/
95-100% of the required
meetings/conferences/
meetings, conferences and other Accomplishment Reports on the conduct COPs were attended
office related transactions and of other related activities (other
conduct of other related activites. mandated DepEd PPAs e.g. Gulayan sa 2 Efficiency 5 5 0.1
Paaralan, SBFP, DRRM, etc.) 85-89.99% of other Below 85% of other No evidence shown
95-100% of other mandated 90-94.99% of other
mandated DepEd PPAs/
mandated DepEd PPAs/ mandated DepEd PPAs/
95-100% of other mandated
DepEd PPAs/ related related activities were related activities were DepEd PPAs/ related
activities were conducted related activities were conducted conducted activities were conducted
conducted
Objective 2 1. Received and logged 4%
communication/memoranda 2.
Routed of communications/memoranda
Received, logged, and acted upon 3. Follow-up on action slips
communications/requests. routed.
85-100% of the received 70%-84% of the received 55%-70% of the received 54% and below of the 85-100% of the received
Efficiency and logged and logged and logged received and logged and logged
1 communication/requests communication/requests communication/requests communication/requests No evidence shown communication/requests 5 5 0.05
were routed and acted
were routed and acted upon were routed and acted upon were routed and acted upon were routed and acted upon upon

Page 19 of 24
 TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
Performance Indicators ACTUAL RATINGS SCORE

Objectives Means of Verification (MOV) Weight per RESULTS

KRA Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
QET Q E T Ave. Rating x Weight
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
Objective 3 1. Any proof of invitation/attendance to
special committee based
gatherings/activities (member of Local
Participated actively in other School Board, MDRR, etc.) 2.
government committees and Certificates/Plaques/Letter of
organzations and other tasks Commendation/other similar document
assigned/received recognitions from 3. Any other relevant document Either of the following Either of the following
DepEd recognized organizations Either of the following indicators: indicators: Either of the following
indicators: A. Participated in 3 or more A. Participated in 2 or more indicators:
A. Participated in 4 or more special committee-based special committee-based A. Participated in 1 or more
4% 1 Efficiency special committee-based gatherings/similar activities gatherings/similar activities special committee-based No evidence shown 1 Participated 2 2 0.02
gatherings/similar activities B. B. gathering/similar activity
B. Received Received 3 Received 2 B. Received
4 recognitions/awards recognitions/awards recognitions/awards 1 recognition/award

SUBTOTAL (KRA 6) 0.17

*To get the score, the rating is multiplied by the weight assigned. 100% OVERALL RATING FOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS 4.186666667

Descriptive Rating Descriptive Rating Very Satisfactory

4.500 - 5.000 Outstanding
3.500 - 4.499 Very Satisfactory
2.500 - 3.499 Satisfactory
1.500 - 2.499 Unsatisfactory
1.000 - 1.499 Poor
HENRIETTA T. MANAGBANAG EdD, CESO VI MARIZA S. MAGAN EdD, CESO V
Ratee ASDS/Rater SDS/ Approving Authority

Page 20 of 24
 PART II: COMPETENCIES
CORE BEHAVIORAL COMPETENCIES

Self-Management Teamwork
1 Sets personal goals and direction, needs and development. 4 1
Willingly does his/her share of responsibilty. 4
4 2 Promotes collaboration and removes barriers to teamwork and goal accomplishment across 4 4
2 Undertakes personal actions and behaviors that are clear and purposive and takes 4 the organization
into account personal goals and values congruent to that of the organization.
3 Applies negotiation principles in arriving at win-win agreements. 4
3 Displays emotional maturity and enthusiasm for and is challenged by higher goals 4 4
4
Drives consensus and team ownership of decisions.
4
Prioritize work tasks and schedules (through gantt charts, checklists, etc.) to 4 5
achieve goals. Works constructively and collaboratively with others and across organizations to
4
5 Sets high quality, challenging, realistic goals for self and others 4 accomplish organizational goals and objectives.

Professionalism and Ethics Service Orientation

1 Demonstrates the values and behavior enshrined in the Norms of Conduct and 4 1 Can explain and articulate organizational directions, issues and problems. 4
Ethical Standards for public officials and employee (RA 6713).

2 Practices ethical and professional behavior and conduct taking into account the 4 2 Takes personal responsibilty for dealing with and/or correcting costumer service issues and 4
impact of his/her actions and decisions. 4 concerns 4
3 Maintains professional image: being trustworthy, regularity of attendance and 4 3 Initiates activities that promotes advocacy for men and women empowerment. 4
punctuality, good grooming and communication.

4 Makes personal sacrifices to meet the organization's needs. 4 4 Participates in updating of office vision, mission, mandates & strategies based on DepEd 4
strategies and directions.

5 Acts with a sense pf urgency and responsibility to meet the organization's needs, 4 5 Develops and adopts service improvement programs through simplified procedures that 4
improves systems and help others improve their effectiveness. will further enhance service delivery.

Result Focus Innovation

1 Achieves results with optimal use of time and resources most of the time. 4 1 Examines the root cause of problems and suggests effective solutions. Fosters new ideas, 3
processes, and suggests bettter ways to do things (cost and/or operational efficiency).

2 Avoids rework, mistakes and wastage through effective work methods by placing 4 2 Demonstrates an ability to think "beyond the box". Continuously focuses on improving 3
organizational needs before personal needs. personal productivity to create higher value and results.

3 Delivers error-free outputs most of the time by conforming to standard operating 4 3 Promotes a creative climate and inspires co-workers to develop original ideas or solutions. 3
procedures correctly and consistently. Able to produce very satisfactoy quality of
work in terms of usefulness/acceptability and completeness with no supervision
4 3
required.
4 Expresses a desire to do better and may express frustration at waste or 4 4 Translates creative thinking into tangible changes and solutions that improve the work unit and organization. 3
inefficiency. May focus on new or more precise ways of meeting goals set.

5 Makes specific changes in the system or in own work methods to improve 4 5 Uses ingenious methods to accomplish responsibilties. Demonstrates resourcefulness and the ability to succeed
with minimal resources.
3
performance. Examples may include doing something better, faster at a lower
cost, more efficiently, or improving qulaity, customer satisfaction, morale without
setting specific goal

5 - Role Model; 4 - Consistently demonstrates; 3 - Most of the time demonstrates; 2 - Sometimes demonstrates; 1 - Rarely demonstrates

DEPED RPMS Form for Head of Office

 LEADERSHIP COMPETENCIES People Development
Leading People 1 Improves the skills and effectiveness of individuals through employing a range of 4
development strategies.

1 Uses basic persuasion techniques in a discussion or presentation e.g., staff 5 2 Facilitates workforce effectiveness through coaching and motivating/developing people 4
mobilization, appeals to reason and/or emotions, uses data and examples, visual
aids.
5
within a work environment that promotes mutual trust and respect.
4
2 Persuades, convinces or influences others, in order to have a specific impact or 5 3 Conceptualizes and implements learning interventions to meet identified training needs. 4
effect.
3 "Sets a good example", is a credible and respected leader; and demonstrates 5 4 Does long-term coaching or training by arranging appropriate and helpful assignments, 4
desired behavior. formal training, or other experiences for the purpose of supporting a person's learning and
development.
4 Forwards personal, professional and work unit needs and interests in an issue. 5 5 Cultivates a learning environment by structuring interactive experiences succh as looking 4
dfor the future opportunities that are in support of achieving individual career goals.

5 Assumes a pivotal role in promoting the development of an inspiring, relevant 5

vision for the organization and infuences others to share ownership of DepEd
goals, in order to create an effective work environment.

People Performance Management OVER-ALL CORE BEHAVIORAL AND LEADERSHIP COMPETENCY RATING
1 Makes specific changes in the performance management system or in own work 4
methods to improve performance (e.g., does something better, faster, at lower
cost, more efficiently; improves quality, costumer satisfaction, morale, revenues). 4.00

2 Sets performance standards and measures progress of employees based on office 4

and department targets. 4

3 Provides feedback and technical assistance such as coaching for performance 4 5 - Role Model; 4 - Consistently demonstrates; 3 - Most of the time
improvement and action planning.
demonstrates; 2 - Sometimes demonstrates; 1 - Rarely demonstrates
4 States performance expectations clearly and checks understanding and 4
committment.
Note: These ratings can be used for the developmental plans of the employee.
5 Performs all the stages of Results-based Performance Management System 4
supported by evidence and required doccuments/forms.

DEPED RPMS Form for Head of Office

 PART III. SUMMARY OF RATINGS FOR DISCUSSION

Final Performance Results Ratings Adjectival Rating

Accomplishments of KRA's and Objectives 4.187 Very Satisfactory

RATER-RATEE AGREEMENT
The signatures below confirm that the employee and his/her superior have agreed on the contents of this appraisal form and the performance rating.

Name of Ratee: LORNA M. MAJAIT Name of Rater: HENRIETTA T. MANAGBANAG EdD, CESO VI
Signature: Signature: Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
Date: January 11, 2024 Date:

PART IV. DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Strengths Development Needs Action Plan Timeline Resources Needed
KRA 1, Ojective 2
KRA 1, Objective 1 Collaborated with school
Engaged the personnel in the conduct of research
*Conduct
school community in the development and and utilization of finding INSET/LAC SESSION on research and utilization of findings in facilitating data-driven and evidence based innovations.
in facilitating Year-roundINSET Budget , office supplies and resource speaker
implementation of school plans aligned with data-driven and evidence-based
institution goals and policies innovations to improve school
performance

HENRIETTA T. MANAGBANAG EdD, CESO VI MARIZA S. MAGAN EdD, CESO V

Head Teacher I Assistant Schools Division Superintendent Schools Division Superintendent
Ratee Rater Approving Authority