Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)

Name of Employee: MARGGIE A. OBLIGACION, Ph.D. Name of Rater: MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D.
Position: Senior Education Program Specialist Position: Chief, SGOD
Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2018 Date of Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2018
Division: Capiz
Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) SCORE
ojectives Results Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
Planning Frame, Systems and Plan 1. Provided inputs to the adjusted June to July 2018 20% Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual
Annual Implementation Plan adjusted Annual Implementation Plan by 100 % beyond the
5 5 5 5 1.000
Implementation Plan by due date.
100%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
Performance Indicators 4-Very Satisfactory
Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual
adjusted Annual Implementation Plan by 95% one week
Targets
Implementation Plan by after the due date
95%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual
adjusted Annual Implementation Plan by 85 % two weeks
Implementation Plan by after the due date
85%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Provided inputs to the 2- Facilitated the first draft of the adjusted
adjusted Annual Annual Implementation Plan by 75% three
Implementation Plan by weeks after the due date
75%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Provided inputs to the 1-Prepared and facilitated the adjusted
adjusted Annual Annual Implementation Plan by 50% 4
Implementation Plan by weeks after the due date.
50%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
Monitored and evaluated
Monitored and evaluated reports of all
2. Monitored and evaluated reports for
reports of all elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof all the
the implementation of the planning
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the elem./sec,/integrated schools on planning
system in the schools division office June -Dec 2018 20% 5 5 5 5 1.000
ated schools in the division implementation of the system implementation on the scheduled
and learning centers towards the
on planning system for planning system on time time/date.
continuous improvement of the system
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources
Quality Efficiency
Form 3 - Enrolment BOSY 4-Very Satisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports of half of the
reports half of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one half
GESP - Governemnt School Profile for elementary/secondary/integr schools for the the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
EBEIS/LIS ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation ttwo (2)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
NSBI - National School Building
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
Inventory
3-Satisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one third of the
reports one third of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one third
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation ttwo (3)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one fourth of the
reports one fourthof the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the fourth the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation four (4)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one eight of the
reports one eight of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the eightof the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation 5 weeks
on planning system for planning system on time after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
Provided complete
descriptive and analytical
analyzed consolidated and made accurate
BASIC EDUCATION INFORMATION SYSTEM 1. Provided descriptive and analytical report of processed basic
reports on the processed education data on
(EBEIS) MAINTENANCE AND REPORT report of processed basic education Aug-18 10% education data to be used in 5 5 5 5 0.500
time, right after it was generated from the
GENERATION data to be used in planning planning which are reliable,
LIS/EBEIS
accurate data to be used in
planning
Performance Indicators Quality Efficiency Timeliness
such as: 4-Very Satisfactory

provided trustworthy
analyzed, consolidated and made
Enrolment/Participation/Cohort/ descriptive and analytical
trustworthy but incomplete reports on the
Repetition/Drop-out/Participation/ reports of processed basic
processed education data one month after it
Pomotion, etc. education data to be used
was generated from the EBEIS/LIS
in planning

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Provided dependable analyzed, consolidated and made partial
descriptive and analytical but dependable report 2 months after it
report to be used in planning was generated from the EBEIS/LIS.

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Made partial reports on the
made good partial reports on the
descriptive and analytical
processed education data 3 months after it
reports of processed data
was generated from the EBEIS/LIS.
to be used in planning.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor

analyzed, consolidated and made report on

Made incomplete report on
the processed education data months after
the processed education data
it was generated from the EBEIS/LIS

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3.. Help enriched the quality of services in the Sep-18 enriched/improved
planning and research section to ensure enriched Enhanced the quality of services in the
excellently the quality of
accurate, timely and reliable information /improved the quality of planning and research section to ensure
services in the planning
through technical assistance. 10% services in the planning and accurate, timely and reliable information in 5 5 5 5 0.500
and research section
research section accurately the planning and research section for this
accurately.
year and for the coming years.

Quality Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
enrich the quality of Enhanced the quality of services in the
improved the quality of
servicesvery satisfactorily planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning
in the planning and accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section
research section the planning and research section for
accurately
accurately. school year.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
enhanced the quality of services in the
made better the quality of made better the quality
planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning of services in the
accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section planning and research
the planning and research section for 2016-
accurately section accurately
2017
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
enhanced the quality of services in the
employed the quality of employed good quality
planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning services in the planning
accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section and research section
the planning and research section for 10
accurately. accurately.
months

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
helped to make the quality helped to make the enhanced the quality of services in the
of services in the planning quality of services in the planning and research section and to ensure
and research section planning and research accurate, timely and reliable information in
accurately section accurately the planning and research section for the
days with classes.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ON 1. Enhanced and increased the number June-Dec. 2018 Enhanced/ Increased the Upgraded the quality of
Increased the number of submitted action
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES of submitted action researches to the number of submitted submitted action
10% researches in the division office by 90% 5 5 5 5 0.500
division office action researches in the researches in the
from June to present
division office by 90% division office
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Raised the number of Intensified technical Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action researches assistance for the researches in the districts, schools, and the division
in the districts, schools, and office by 80% from June to August
conduct of action
the division office by 85% researches in the
division office
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory

Raised the number of

Thoroughly edited the Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action
submitted action researches in the districts, schools, and the
researches in the
researches in the division office by 75% from June to
districts, schools, and the
division office September
division office by 75%

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Raised the number of Made revisions on Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action submitted action researches in the districts, schools, and the
researches in the division researches in the division office by 65% from June to October
office by 65% division office 2017
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Returned for revision the
Raised the number of submitted action
Raised the number of submitted action
researches in the districts, schools, and the
submitted action researches researches to the
division office by 50% from June to ist week
in the division office by 50% proponent for
of October 2016
improvement
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2.Provided technical interventions on August-November 2018
identified needs of schools division,
schools and learning centers, schools 5-Provided 100% technical
and learning centers with regards to interventions on the 5-Provided 100% technical interventions on
planning and research, 10% identified needs of schools the identified needs of schools in the 5 5 5 5 0.500
and learning centers through division twice a month.
action research

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
4- Provided 95% technical
4-Provided 95% technical interventions on
interventions on the
identified needs of schoolsin the division
identified needs of schools
once a month
and learning centers.

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
3- Provided 90% technical
3-Provided 90% technical interventions on
interventions on the
the identified needs of schols in the division
identified needs of schools
twice every 2 months.
and learning centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
2- Provided 80%
technical interventions on 2-Provided 80% technical interventions on
the identified needs of the identified needs of schools in the
schools and learning division thrice a year.
centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
1- Provided 70% technical
1-Provided 70% technical interventions on
interventions on the
the identified needs of the schools in the
identified needs of schools
division once a year.
and learning centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Evaluated and recommended action
researches/innovation/IGP for approval Evaluated and recommended Evaluated and
and provided technical assistance on the 50 action researches for recommended for
identified needs of schools and learning approval of the SDS with approval b of the SDS
centers June-Dec. 2018 5% terminal report and provided 50 5 5 5 5 5 0.250
technical assistance on the action research studies
identified needs of schools for C.Y 2018 without any
and learning centers revisions.

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory

Evaluated and approved Evaluated and

45 action researches and recommended for
provided technical approval by the SDS 45
assistance on the
identified needs of action research studies
schools and learning for C.Y 2018 with minor
centers revision

action research
Quality studies for C.Y 2017 Timeliness
without revisions.

3-Satisfactory

Evaluated and approved

Evaluated and
35 action researches and
recommended for
provided technical
approval by the SDS 35
assistance on the
identified needs of
action research studies
schools and learning
for C.Y 2018 with major
centers
revision

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Evaluated and
Evaluated and approved
recommended for
25 action researches and
approval by the SDS 25
provided technical
assistance on the
action research studies
identified needs of
for C.Y 2018 for re-
schools and learning
editing
centers

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
Evaluated and approved 15 Evaluated and
action researches and recommended 15 action
provided technical assistance researches for approval
on the identified needs of by the SDS
schools and learning center for C.Y 2018 but
returned to proponent
due to non -
compliance of the
prescribed format

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
1.Served as Master trainer/coach on June 2018 onwards 5- completed the 7-month
5- very satisfactorily
Continuous Improvement 5% certification as master 5- 7 months plus 8 coaching sessions 5 5 5 5 0.250
completed
Plus Factor trainer/coach on CI.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory

4- attended the the 4- satisfactorily

4- 7 months plus 7 coaching sessions
seminar /workshop on CI. completed
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
3- attended at least 5 3-completed the training
3- 7 months plus 6 coaching sessions
coaching sessions course
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
2- attended at least 4 2-fairly completed the
2- 7 months plus 5 coaching sessions
coaching sessions. training
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
1- attended at least 3 1-poorly completed the
1- 7 months plus 3 coaching sessions
coaching sessions. training.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2.Served as learning facilitator May-18 5.00%
(resource speaker) during the 2nd 5- 10 times 5- very satisfactory 5- 5 days
Roll-out on Continuous Improvement 4 4 4 4 0.200
in the Division.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
4- satisfactory completed
4- 8 times 4- 4 days

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Weight per Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Results SCORE
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory

3- 6 times 3-fair 3- 3 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory

2- 5 times 2- 2 days
2-good

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
1-4 times 1-poor

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3.Served as INSET Resource Speaker 5- 5 times 5-very satisfactory 5- 5 days
during LAC Sessions in Schools on Oct-18 4 4 4 4 0.200
matters such as Research, Innovation 5.00%
& and IGP Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory

4-4times 4- satisfactory completed 4- 4 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory

3-3 times 3-fair 3- 3 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory

2-twice 2-good 2- 2 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor

1-once 1-1 day

1-poor

4.9
Approved:

___________________________________
MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D. MARGGIE A. OBLIGACION, Ph.D. NICASIO S. FRIO
Rater Ratee Assistant Schools Division Superintendent

DepEd Region VI IPCRF Template

 Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)
Name of Employee: EDUARDO D. VILLAFUERTE Name of Rater: MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D.
Position: PLANNING OFFICER III Position: Chief, SGOD
Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2017 Date of Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2017
Division: Capiz
ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1. Provide education data for January to 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
planning and research purposes December provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
before deadline 2017 submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared 20% All Educational data All data properly Educational data
annnual/mid-year/quarterly provided prepared for provided on time before On time
reports of programs and projects submission deadline before 5 5 5 5 1.000
(BED 2) before deadline deadline

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides
On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline
before
only submission
deadline

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provided data for DEDP 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS July 2017 to Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
PROCESSING AND 1. Collected, encoded, validated March 2017 and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
VALIDATION and processes data gathered from 10% schools copies provided to sed on time deadline 5 5 5 5 0.500
school profiles before deadline internal satkeholders

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared data based outputs Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
before deadline and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% schools copies provided to sed on time deadline 5 5 5 5 0.250
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3. Provided Education statistics to Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
various agencies before dealine and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% 5 5 5 5 0.250
schools copies provided to sed on time deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 1. Provide technical assistance to June 2017 to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
public elementary and secvondary may 2017 provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
schools in encoding of the BEIS ( BOSY to 10% advisory and text that 472 4 4 4 4 0.400
school profiles EOSY) the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance

provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Provide technical assistance to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
public elementary and secondary provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
schools in the encoding of 15% advisory and text that 472 5 5 5 5 0.500
Learners Information System the BES is ready for
(LIS) updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3. Provide technical assistance to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
Private schools in the encoding provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
of EBEIS and LIS school profiles 5% advisory and text that 5 5 5 5 0.250
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
1. Conducted orientation seminar All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
to schools reagrding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
PLUS FACTOR accomplishment and encoding of 5% seminar seminar schools 472 5 5 5 5 0.250
BEIS school profiles and planning
activities
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
472
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Conduceted orientation All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
seminars to schools reagrding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
2.50% 472 5 5 5 5 0.125
accomplishments and encoding of seminar seminar schools
LIS
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
472
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars

inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
 ACTUAL RATING
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results Q E T A

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3. Conducted orientation seminars All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
to schools regarding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
accomplishments and encoding 2.50% seminar seminar schools 5 5 5 5 5 0.125
other school profiles and planning
activities
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
4.65
Approved:

___________________________________
MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D. EDUARDO D. VILLAFUERTE NICASIO S. FRIO
Rater Ratee Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
 Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)
Name of Employee: JAMIE ROSE C. MAGSILA Name of Rater: MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D.
Position: CLERK Research & Planning Position: Chief, SGOD
Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2017 Date of Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2017
Division: Capiz

Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING

MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
PLANNING AND 1. Assisting education data for January to 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
RESEARCH planning and research December provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
purposes before deadline 2017 submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared annnual/mid- 20% All Educational data All data properly Educational data
year/quarterly reports of provided prepared for provided on time before On time
programs and projects submission deadline before 5 5 5 5 1.000
(BED 2) before deadline deadline

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline On time
only submission before
deadline

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provided data for DEDP 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
EDUCATIONAL 1. Collected, encoded, July 2017 to Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
STATISTICS validated and processes data March 2017 and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
PROCESSING AND 10% schools copies provided to sed on time deadline 5 5 5 5 0.500
gathered from school profiles
VALIDATION before deadline internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared data based Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
outputs before deadline and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% 5 5 5 5 0.250
schools copies provided to sed on time deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provided Education Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
statistics to various agencies and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% 5 5 5 5 0.250
before dealine schools copies provided to sed on time deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 1. Provide technical June 2017 to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
assistance to public may 2017 provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
elementary and secvondary ( BOSY to 10% advisory and text that 472 4 4 4 4 0.400
schools in encoding of the EOSY) the BES is ready for
BEIS school profiles updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Provide technical Technical assistance Technical assistance
All schools notified
assistance to public provided to 472 schools provided to 472 schools
through deped
elementary and secondary
15% advisory and text that 472 5 5 5 5 0.500
schools in the encoding of
the BES is ready for
Learners Information
updating
System (LIS)
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 472
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provide technical Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
assistance to Private schools provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
in the encoding of EBEIS 5% advisory and text that 5 5 5 5 0.250
and LIS school profiles the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
1. Assisted orientation All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
seminar to schools reagrding inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
the accomplishment and seminar seminar schools
PLUS FACTOR encoding of BEIS school 5% 472 5 5 5 5 0.250
profiles and planning activities

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
472
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Assisted orientation All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
seminars to schools reagrding inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
the accomplishments and 2.50% seminar seminar schools 472 5 5 5 5 0.125
encoding of LIS

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
472
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Assisted orientation All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
seminars to schools regarding inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
the accomplishments and seminar seminar schools
encoding other school profiles 2.50% 5 5 5 5 5 0.125
and planning activities

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
4.65
Approved:

___________________________________
MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D. JAMIE ROSE C. MAGSILA NICASIO S. FRIO
Rater Ratee Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
 Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)
Name of Employee: EDUARDO D. VILLAFUERTE Name of Rater: MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D.
Position: PLANNING OFFICER III Position: Chief, SGOD
Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2018 Date of Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2018
Division: Capiz
Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1. Provide education data for January to 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
planning and research purposes December provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
before deadline 2018 submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared 20% All Educational data All data properly Educational data
annnual/mid-year/quarterly provided prepared for provided on time before On time
reports of programs and projects submission deadline before 5 5 5 5 1.000
(BED 2) before deadline deadline

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides
On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline
before
only submission
deadline
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provide & Prepare Annual S.Y 10% All Educational data All data properly Educational data On time
data for the preparation of Annual provided prepared for provided on time before before 5 5 5 5 0.500
Report submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Educational data provided Elementary data Educational data provides On time
on elementary schools prepared for 2 days after deadline before
only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Educational data provided Secondary data Educational data On time
on Secondary schools prepared for provided 3 days after before
only submission deadline deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Educational schools Private school data Educational data
provided on private prepared for provided 4 days after
schools only submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Educational data provided Integrated school data Educational data
on integrated schools prepared for provided 5 days after
submission deadline
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS July 2018 to Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
PROCESSING AND 1. Collected, encoded, validated March 2018 and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
VALIDATION and processes data gathered from 10% schools copies provided to sed on time deadline 5 5 5 5 0.500
school profiles before deadline internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Prepared data based outputs Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
before deadline and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% 5 5 5 5 0.250
schools copies provided to sed on time deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provided Education statistics to Data collected, encoded All data properly filed Data profiles On time
various agencies before dealine and validated from all electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
5% 5 5 5 5 0.250
schools copies provided to sed on time deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Elementary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Elementary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 2 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Data collected, encoded Secondary filed Data profiles On time
and validated Secondary electroncically and validated/encoded/proces before
schools copies provided to sed 3 days after deadline deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Data collected, encoded Private filed Data profiles
and validated Private electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 4 days after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Data collected, encoded Integrated filed Data profiles
and validated Integrated electroncically and validated/encoded/proces
schools copies provided to sed 1 week after deadline
internal satkeholders
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 1. Provide technical assistance to June 2018 to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
public elementary and secvondary may 2018 provided to 471 schools through deped provided to 471 schools
schools in encoding of the BEIS ( BOSY to 10% advisory and text that 471 4 4 4 4 0.400
school profiles EOSY) the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 471
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 471
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Provide technical assistance to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
public elementary and secondary provided to 471 schools through deped provided to 471 schools
schools in the encoding of 15% advisory and text that 471 5 5 5 5 0.500
Learners Information System the BES is ready for
(LIS) updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that 471
the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that 471
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Provide technical assistance to Technical assistance All schools notified Technical assistance
Private schools in the encoding provided to 472 schools through deped provided to 472 schools
of EBEIS and LIS school profiles 5% advisory and text that 5 5 5 5 0.250
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Technical assistance Elementary notified Technical assistance
provided to 450 public through deped provided to 450 schools
elementary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Technical assistance Secondary notified Technical assistance
provided to 425 public through deped provided to 425 schools
secondary schools advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Technical assistance Private notified Technical assistance
provided to 412 schools through deped provided to 412 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Technical assistance Integrated schools Technical assistance
provided to 400 schools notified through deped provided to 400 schools
advisory and text that
the BES is ready for
updating
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
1. Conducted orientation seminar All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
to schools reagrding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 471
PLUS FACTOR accomplishment and encoding of 5% seminar seminar schools 471 5 5 5 5 0.250
BEIS school profiles and planning
activities
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
471
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2. Conduceted orientation All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
seminars to schools reagrding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 471
2.50% 471 5 5 5 5 0.125
accomplishments and encoding of seminar seminar schools
LIS
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
471
seminar notifies of the seminar schools
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools
 Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Actual ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE SCORE
ojectives Timeliness) Results
Q E T A
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Conducted orientation seminars All schools identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
to schools regarding the inclusion in the conduct of schools notifies of the conducted on 472
accomplishments and encoding 2.50% seminar seminar schools 5 5 5 5 0.125
other school profiles and planning
activities
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
Elementary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of elementary schools conducted on 452
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Secondary identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of secondary schools conducted on 425
seminar notifies of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Private identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of private schools notifies conducted on 412
seminar of the seminar schools

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
SUC's identified for DepEd memo sent and Orientation/Seminars
inclusion in the conduct of SUC's notifies of the conducted on 400
seminar seminar schools
4.65
Approved:

___________________________________
MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D. EDUARDO D. VILLAFUERTE NICASIO S. FRIO
Rater Ratee Assistant Schools Division Superintendent
 Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)
Name of Employee: MARGGIE A. OBLIGACION, Ph.D. Name of Rater: MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D.
Position: Senior Education Program Specialist Position: Chief, SGOD
Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2019 Date of Review Period: Jan. - Dec 2019
Division: Capiz
Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
Planning Frame, Systems and Plan 1. Provided inputs to the adjusted June to 20% Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual Provided inputs to
Annual Implementation Plan (Year 4) July 2019 adjusted Annual Implementation Plan (Year 4) by 100 % the adjusted Annual
5 5 5 5 1.000
Implementation Plan (Year 4) beyond the due date. Implementation Plan
by 100%. (Year 4) by 100%
Quality Efficiency Timeliness beyond the due date
Performance Indicators 4-Very Satisfactory
Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual
adjusted Annual Implementation Plan by 95% one week
Targets
Implementation Plan by after the due date
95%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Provided inputs to the Provided inputs to the adjusted Annual
adjusted Annual Implementation Plan by 85 % two weeks
Implementation Plan by after the due date
85%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Provided inputs to the 2- Facilitated the first draft of the adjusted
adjusted Annual Annual Implementation Plan by 75% three
Implementation Plan by weeks after the due date
75%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Provided inputs to the 1-Prepared and facilitated the adjusted
adjusted Annual Annual Implementation Plan by 50% 4
Implementation Plan by weeks after the due date.
50%.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding

Monitored and
Monitored and evaluated evaluated reports of
Monitored and evaluated reports of all 471 all
2. Monitored and evaluated reports for
reports of all elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof all the elementary/secondar
the implementation of the planning
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the elem./sec,/integrated schools on planning y/integrated schools
system in the schools division office June -Dec 2 20% 5 5 5 5 1.000
ated schools in the division implementation of the system implementation on the scheduled in the division on
and learning centers towards the
on planning system for planning system on time time/date. planning system for
continuous improvement of the system
continuous improvement with less amount of continuous
resources improvement on the
she4dule time & date
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency
Enrolment BOSY 4-Very Satisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports of half of the
reports half of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one half
GESP - Governemnt School Profile for elementary/secondary/integr schools for the the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
EBEIS/LIS ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation ttwo (2)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

NSBI - National School Building

Quality Efficiency Timeliness
Inventory
3-Satisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one third of the
reports one third of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one third
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation ttwo (3)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one fourth of the
reports one fourthof the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the fourth the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation four (4)
on planning system for planning system on time weeks after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor

Monitored and evaluated

Monitored and evaluated reports one eight of the
reports one eight of the elem./sec./integrated Monitored and evaluated reportsof one
elementary/secondary/integr schools for the eightof the elem./sec,/integrated schools on
ated schools in the division implementation of the planning system implementation 5 weeks
on planning system for planning system on time after the scheduled time/date.
continuous improvement with less amount of
resources

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
Provided 100%
Provided complete descriptive and
descriptive and analytical analytical report of
analyzed consolidated and made accurate
BASIC EDUCATION INFORMATION 1. Provided descriptive and analytical report of processed basic processed basic
reports on the processed education data on
SYSTEM (EBEIS) MAINTENANCE AND report of processed basic education Aug-19 10% education data to be used in education data to be 5 5 5 5 0.500
time, right after it was generated from the
REPORT GENERATION data to be used in planning planning which are reliable, used in planning
LIS/EBEIS
accurate data to be used in which are reliable,
planning accurate data to be
used in planning
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Performance Indicators Quality Efficiency Timeliness
such as: 4-Very Satisfactory

provided trustworthy
analyzed, consolidated and made
Enrolment/Participation/Cohort/ descriptive and analytical
trustworthy but incomplete reports on the
Repetition/Drop-out/Participation/ reports of processed basic
processed education data one month after it
Pomotion, etc. education data to be used
was generated from the EBEIS/LIS
in planning

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory
Provided dependable analyzed, consolidated and made partial
descriptive and analytical but dependable report 2 months after it
report to be used in planning was generated from the EBEIS/LIS.

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Made partial reports on the
made good partial reports on the
descriptive and analytical
processed education data 3 months after it
reports of processed data
was generated from the EBEIS/LIS.
to be used in planning.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor

analyzed, consolidated and made report on

Made incomplete report on
the processed education data months after
the processed education data
it was generated from the EBEIS/LIS

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
3.. Help enriched the quality of services in the Sep-19
planning and research section to ensure enriched
enriched/improved
accurate, timely and reliable information enriched Enhanced the quality of services in the /improved the
through technical assistance. excellently the quality of
/improved the quality of planning and research section to ensure quality of services in
services in the planning
10% services in the planning and accurate, timely and reliable information in the planning and 5 5 5 5 0.500
and research section
research section accurately the planning and research section for this research section
accurately.
year and for the coming years. accurately by 100%

Quality Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
enrich the quality of Enhanced the quality of services in the
improved the quality of
servicesvery satisfactorily planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning
in the planning and accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section
research section the planning and research section for
accurately
accurately. school year.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
enhanced the quality of services in the
made better the quality of made better the quality
planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning of services in the
accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section planning and research
the planning and research section for 2016-
accurately section accurately
2017
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
enhanced the quality of services in the
employed the quality of employed good quality
planning and research section and to ensure
services in the planning services in the planning
accurate, timely and reliable information in
and research section and research section
the planning and research section for 10
accurately. accurately.
months
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
helped to make the quality helped to make the enhanced the quality of services in the
of services in the planning quality of services in the planning and research section and to ensure
and research section planning and research accurate, timely and reliable information in
accurately section accurately the planning and research section for the
days with classes.
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ON 1. Enhanced and increased the number June-Dec. Enhanced/ Increased the Enhanced and
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES of submitted action researches to the 2019 number of submitted increased the
division office action researches in the Upgraded the quality of number of submitted
division office by 90% Increased the number of submitted action action researches to
submitted action
10% researches in the division office by 90% the division office 5 5 5 5 0.500
researches in the
from June to present from 20-35 action
division office
researches (90%)

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Raised the number of Intensified technical Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action researches assistance for the researches in the districts, schools, and the division
in the districts, schools, and office by 80% from June to August
conduct of action
the division office by 85% researches in the
division office
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory

Raised the number of

Thoroughly edited the Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action
submitted action researches in the districts, schools, and the
researches in the
researches in the division office by 75% from June to
districts, schools, and the
division office September
division office by 75%

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
Raised the number of Made revisions on Raised the number of submitted action
submitted action submitted action researches in the districts, schools, and the
researches in the division researches in the division office by 65% from June to October
office by 65% division office 2017
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Returned for revision the
Raised the number of submitted action
Raised the number of submitted action
researches in the districts, schools, and the
submitted action researches researches to the
division office by 50% from June to 1st
in the division office by 50% proponent for
week of October 2019
improvement
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
2.Provided technical interventions on August- Provided 100%
identified needs of schools division, November technical
school,s and learning centers, schools 2019 5-Provided 100% technical
interventions on the
and learning centers with regards to interventions on the 5-Provided 100% technical interventions on
identified needs of
planning and research. 10% identified needs of schools the identified needs of schools in the 5 5 5 5 0.500
schools and learning
and learning centers through division twice a month.
centers through
action research
action research twice
a month
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
4- Provided 95% technical
4-Provided 95% technical interventions on
interventions on the
identified needs of schoolsin the division
identified needs of schools
once a month
and learning centers.
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
3- Provided 90% technical
3-Provided 90% technical interventions on
interventions on the
the identified needs of schols in the division
identified needs of schools
twice every 2 months.
and learning centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
2- Provided 80%
technical interventions on 2-Provided 80% technical interventions on
the identified needs of the identified needs of schools in the
schools and learning division thrice a year.
centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
1- Provided 70% technical
1-Provided 70% technical interventions on
interventions on the
the identified needs of the schools in the
identified needs of schools
division once a year.
and learning centers
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
3. Evaluated and recommended 30 action
researches, innovation, and IGP for
Evaluated and
approval of the SDS and 17 basic and Evaluated and
action researches for BERF for approval of
recommended 30,
Evaluated and recommended recommended 30,
the SDRC and endorsed to the resgional Innovation and IGP
30, Innovation and IGP and Innovation and IGP and
office. and 17 basic and
17 basic and action 17 basic and action
action researches for
June-Dec. 2 5% researches for BERF for researches for BERF for 5 5 5 5 0.250
BERF for approval
approval of the SDRC and approval of the SDRC
of the SDRC and
endorsed to the Regional and endorsed to the
endorsed to the
Office Regional Office without
Regional Office
any revisions
without any revisions

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
Evaluated and
Evaluated and recommended recommended 25,
25, Innovation and IGP and Innovation and IGP and
17 basic and action 17 basic and action
researches for BERF for researches for BERF for
approval of the SDRC and approval of the SDRC
endorsed to the Regional and endorsed to the
Office Regional Office without
any revisions
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
Evaluated and
Evaluated and recommended recommended 20,
20, Innovation and IGP and Innovation and IGP and
17 basic and action 17 basic and action
researches for BERF for researches for BERF for
approval of the SDRC and approval of the SDRC
endorsed to the Regional and endorsed to the
Office Regional Office with
minor revisions
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
Evaluated and
Evaluated and recommended recommended 20,
15, Innovation and IGP and Innovation and IGP and
17 basic and action 17 basic and action
researches for BERF for researches for BERF for
approval of the SDRC and approval of the SDRC
endorsed to the Regional and endorsed to the
Office Regional Office with
major revisions
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
Evaluated and
recommended 10 action
Evaluated and recommended
researches for approval
10, Innovation and IGP and
by the SDS
17 basic and action
for C.Y 2019 but
researches for BERF for
returned to proponent
approval of the SDRC and
due to non -
endorsed to the Regional
compliance of the
Office
prescribed format

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

5-Outstanding
4. Provided and used researches Jan-Dec Utilized 100%
datum/templates in the division 2019 5- very satisfactorily datum/templates in
5% 5- implemented 4 4 4 4 0.200
website used the division
website
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory
4- partially implemented 4- partially used
Quality Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
3- seldomly implemented 3-seldomly used
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
2- not implemented 2-not used
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
1- poorly implemented 1- poorly used
Quality Efficiency
5-Outstanding
1. Served as GAD Focal Person Nov. 2019 5.00% Served as Resource
5- very satisfactorily rendred 5- served as Focal Speaker duting
Plus factor services as focal person for 3 Person for 3 consecutive GAD Seminar 5 5 5 5 0.250
years years

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

4-Very Satisfactory
4- satisfactorily rendred 4- served as Focal
services as focal person for 2 Person for 2 consecutive
years years
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
3- satisfactorily rendered 3- served as Focal
services as focal person for 1 Person for 1 consecutive
year years
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory
2- rendered services as 2- served as Focal
focal person Person
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
1- rendered services as 1- served as Focal
focal person 4 years ago Person 4 years ago
 Weight per ACTUAL RATING
MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES TIMELINE ojectives Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual Results SCORE
Q E T Average
Quality Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding
Served as Quality Assurance Technical QATAME for 5 trainings 5- 5 days Served as Quality
Assistance and Monitoring Evaluation Oct-19 Assurance 5 5 5 5 0.250
(QATAME) Associate in various 5.00% Technical
trainings and development programs Quality Efficiency Timeliness Assistance and
in the divison. 4-Very Satisfactory Monitoring

QATAME for 4 trainings

4-4times 4- 4 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

3-Satisfactory

QATAME for 3 trainings

3-3 times 3- 3 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

2-Unsatisfactory
QATAME for 2 trainings
2-twice 2- 2 days

Quality Efficiency Timeliness

1-Poor
QATAME for 1 trainings
1-once 1-1 day

\ 4.9500

Approved:

___________________________________
MARLON P. DESTREZA, Ed.D. MARGGIE A. OBLIGACION, Ph.D. NICASIO S. FRIO
Rater Ratee Schools Division Superintendent
 Individual
Name of Employee: John Doe
Position: Administrative Assistant III
Review Period: January-December 2021
Division: Capiz

MFO's KRA's OBJECTIVES

1 1
2

3
 Plus factor

Ratee
 Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
Region 6- Western Visayas
Schools Division of Capiz

Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF) for Year

Name of Rater:
Position:
Date of Review Period:

TIMELINE Weight per Performance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficie

Objective

Quality
5-Outstanding

Quality
4-Very Satisfactory

Quality
3-Satisfactory

Quality
2-Unsatisfactory

Quality
1-Poor
Quality
5-Outstanding

Quality
4-Very Satisfactory

Quality
3-Satisfactory

Quality
2-Unsatisfactory

Quality
1-Poor

Quality
5-Outstanding

Quality
4-Very Satisfactory

Quality
3-Satisfactory
 Quality
2-Unsatisfactory

Quality
1-Poor

Overall Rating for Accomplishments

Rater
hilippines
ducation

d Review Form (IPCRF) for Year 2021

ACTUAL RATING
ormance Indicators(Quality/Effectiveness, Efficiency, Timeliness) Actual
Results Q

Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding

Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor
 Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding

Efficiency
4-Very Satisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor

Efficiency Timeliness
5-Outstanding

Efficiency Timeliness
4-Very Satisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
3-Satisfactory
 Efficiency Timeliness
2-Unsatisfactory

Efficiency Timeliness
1-Poor

plishments

Approved:

Approving Authority
ACTUAL RATING
Final Rating
E T Ave.
y