Ipcrf Marjo .S

POSITION AND COMPETENCY PROFILE PCP No.
_________ Revision Code: 00
Department of Education
Postion Title Master Teacher I Salary Grade 18
Parenthetical Title
Office Unit Effectivity Date
Reports to Principal/ School Heads Page/s
Position Supervised
JOB SUMMARY
QUALIFICATION STANDARDS
A. CSC Prescribed Qualifications
Education Bachelor of Elementary/Secondary/Early Childhood Education or Bachelor's degree plus 18 professional unit in Education
Experience None required
Eligibility RA 1080
Trainings None required
B. Preferred Qualifications
Education BSE/BSEEd/College Graduate with education units (18-21), MA units 18 units
Experience
Eligibility PBET/LET Passers
Trainings In-Service training
Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form
Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

Position: Position:
Review Period: Date of Review:
Bureau/Center/Service/DiviDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING
MFOs KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE Weight per KRA
MFO: BASIC Teaching- Prepared more than

EDUCATION Learning 180 Daily Lesson
SERVICES Process Log(DLL) based on
25% Curriculum
inCurriculum Guide in
relation to
contextualized and
localized culture with
adequate and
appropriate used of
#RSH#
Instructional Materials
ch
EDUCATION Learning 180 Daily Lesson
SERVICES Process Log(DLL) based on
25% Curriculum
inCurriculum Guide in
relation to
contextualized and
localized culture with
adequate and
appropriate used of
Instructional Materials
June-March
10%
#RSH#
Facilitated learning
to 37 Grade VI pupils
through the use of
functional Daily Lesson
Log & LG,modules, TG
and other learning
resources
June-March
8%
#RSH#
Conducted efficient
and functional
Remedial Teaching for
37 Grade VIpupils and
one Grade IV sit-in
pupil to improve
June-March
learners
conceptual/learning 7%
understanding
especilly to those
SARDOS
* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned
#RSH#
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
#RSH#
and Review Form
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Quality) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Efficiency) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Timeliness)
5-Adequate and appropriate used of

Instructional Materials in relation to
5 - 180 & above prepared DLL 5 - One day advance DLL
contextualized and localized culture in
performing the 180 Daily Lesson Log
#RSH#
4-Inadequate and appropriate used of

Instructional Materials in relation to
4- 170-179 prepared DLL 4 - On the day prepared DLL
3-Inadequate and less appropriate used

of Instructional Materials in relation
to contextualized and localized culture 3 - 160-169 prepared DLL 3 - Late for 1 day DLL
in performing the 180 Daily Lesson
Log
2-Inadequate used of Instructional
Materials in relation to
2- 150-159 prepared DLL 2- Late for 1 week DLL
1-Inadequate and inappropriate used
of Instructional Materials in relation
to contextualized and localized culture 1- 149 & below 1 - No Daily Lesson Log at all
in performing the 180 Daily Lesson
Log
#RSH#
5- Functional use of DLL,LG,Modules 5- Used 5 learning resources to facilitate 5- use different learing resources
and TG to facilitate learning learning daily
4- Functional use DLL and less
4- used 4 learning resources to facilitate 4- Use different learning resources 4
functional use of Modules, TG and LG
learning times a week
to facilitate learning
3- Functional use of DLL, TG and LG 3- used 3 learning resources to facilitate 3- Use different learning resouces 3
and less functional use of Modules learning times a week
2- Less Functional use of DLL,TG,LG 2-used 2 learning resources to facilitate 2- Use different learning resources
and modules learning twice a week
1- Not Functional use of DLL,TG,LG 1- used only the DLL to facilitate 1- Use different learning resources
and modules learning once a week
#RSH#
5- Efficient and functional remedial 5- Remediation/ Enrichment Program is 5- Conducted Remediation every
teaching to improved learners offered to 100% and above of students quarter
concepts who needed it
4- Less Efficient and functional
remedial teaching to improve 4- Remediation/ Enrichment Program 4- Conducted Remediation for 3
learner's concepts is offered to 85-99% who needed it quarter period
3- Efficient and less functional 3- Remediation/ Enrichment Program 3- Conducted remediation for 2
remedial teaching to improve is offered to 75-84% who needed it quarter period
learner's concept
2- Less efficient and less functional 2-Remediation/ Enrichment Program 2- Conducted remediation for 1
remedial teaching to improve is offered to65-74% who needed it quarter period
learner's concept
1- Not effiecient and functional 1- Remediation/ Enrichment Program
is offered to 64% and below who 1- No remediation conducted at all
remedial teaching needed it
#RSH#
TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
RATING
ACTUAL RESULTS SCORE*
Q E T Ave.
0 0
#RSH#
0 0
RATING
Q E T Ave.
#RSH#
RATING
Q E T Ave.
0 0
#RSH#
RATING
Q E T Ave.
0 0.0
OVERAL RATING FOR

ACCOMPLISHMENTS 0.00 ###
###
#RSH#
RATING
Q E T Ave.
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Rater ..
#RSH#

Position: Position:
Bureau/Center/Service/DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Weight per
MFOs KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE KRA
MFO: BASIC
EDUCATION
Pupils/ Assessed
SERVICES Students learning/understanding/progr
Outcomes ess appropriately and
20 % systematically to all 45 Grade
III pupils with one Grade 4
pupil sit in pupil for
differentiated instruction
June-April
through 3 types of assessment 10%
(formative,Reflective,
Summative / Quarterly Exam
differentiated instruction
June-Apri
through 3 types of assessment 10%
(formative,Reflective, Weight per
MFOs KRAs
Summative /OBJECTIVES
Quarterly Exam TIMELINE KRA
Conducted functional and

effective
remediation/enrichment
activities to improve the
achievement rate/drop-out
rate
June-April
5%
J
Weight per
Monitored/evaluated/maintai
ned systematic and updated
pupils progress
June-March
5%

Weight per
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
TO
R
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Quality) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Efficiency) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Timeliness) ACTUAL RESULTS
Q
5- Used Reflective, formative, and
5- Used appropriate and systematic summative assessment 5- Used 3 ypes of assessment all
differentiated instruction and through out the school year
assessment
4- Used both reflective and 4- Used 3 types of assessment for 3

formative assessment quarter only
3- Used appropriate and less 3- used both reflective and

systematic differentiated instruction summative assessment
and assessment 3- Used 3 types of assessement for
2 quarter only
2- Used less appropriate and less 2- used formative and summative 2- Used 3 types of assessment for
systematic differentiated instruction assessment 1 quarter only
R
2- Used less appropriate and less 2- used formative and summative 2- Used 3 types of assessment for
Q
systematic differentiated instruction assessment 1 quarter only
and assessment
1- Not appropriate and systematic

used of differentiated instruction and 1- No evidences on the used of 3 1- No evidences on the used of 3
types of assessment types of assessment
assessment
5- Remediation/ Enrichment 5- Conducted Remediation every

5- Functional and Effective Enrichment Program is offered to 100% and quarter
activities to improve above of students who need it
achievement/drop out rate
4- Functional and less effective 4- Remediation/ Enrichment
enrichment activities to improve Program is offered to 85-99% who 4- Conducted Remediation for 3
achievement/drop out rate need it quarter period
3- Less functional and effective 3- Remediation/ Enrichment

enrichment activities to improve Program is offered to 75-84% who
achievement/drop-out rate need it
3- Conducted remediation for 2
quarter period
2- Less functional and less effective 2-Remediation/ Enrichment
enrichment activities to improve Program is offered to65-74% who
achievement rate/drop out rate need it
2- Conducted remediation for 1

quarter period
R
Q
1- Not functional and effective 1- Remediation/ Enrichment
enrichment activities to improve Program is offered to 64% and
acgievement/drop-out rate below who need it 1- No remediation conducted at all
5- Systematic and updated pupil's 5- 100 % updated pupil's record 5- Update pupil's record daily,
record/progress weekly, monthly and quarterly
4- Less systematic and updated pupil's 4- 75-99 % updated pupil's record 4-Update pupil's record weekly,
record/progress monthly and weekly
3- Systematic and less updated pupil's 3- 50-74% updated pupil's record 3-Update pupil's monthly and
record/progress quarterly
2- Less systematic and less updated 2-25-49% updated pupil's record 2-Update pupil's record quarterly
pupil's record/progress
1- Not systematic and updated pupil's 1- 24 % below updated pupil'sts 1- Not updated pupil;s record
record/progress record
OVERAL RATING FOR

0
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
R
Q
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0.0
0.0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Approving Officer

Position: Position:
Weight per
MFO: BASIC
EDUCATION
SERVICES
Community
Involvement
20%
Conducted
e-April
regular/periodic PTA 10%
Weight per
Conducted
June-April
regular/periodic PTA 10%
meetings/conferences
Weight per
Visited parents of
students needing
academic
monitoring/follow-up
June-April
5%
5%
June-
Weight per
Weight per
Undertaken/initiated
projects/events/
activities with external
funding/sponsorship
June-March
5%
June-March
5%
Weight per
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
m
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
TO
R
Q
5-Able to deliver 98 t0 100% of the

5-Fully attended at 4 of the conducted
necessary information and updates or
regular/periodic meeting
agenda 5-Conducted
Conducted thethemeeting
meetingononororwithin
withinthe
Able to deliver 98 t0 100% of the the week of the scheduled meeting
Fully attended at 5 of the conducted week of the scheduled meeting
agenda
4-Fully attended at 3 of the conducted
agenda 4-Conducted the meeting one week
after the scheduled meeting
R
Q
3- Able to deliver 87 t0 92% of the

3- Fully attended at 2 of the conducted necessary information and updates or 3-Conducted the meeting two weeks
regular/periodic meeting agenda after the scheduled meeting

2 attended at 1 of the conducted 2-Conducted the meeting three weeks
regular/periodic meeting after the scheduled meeting
agenda

1-No regular/periodic meeting was 1-Never conducted the periodic
conducted at all meeting
agenda
R
Q
5-Visits the PARDO / Parents and 5-visits the concern on the 5ft day of
5-Was able to attain the regular attendance
successfully accomplish/implement the the concecutive absences until its one
of the PARDO
interventions week.
4-Was able to limit the absences of the 4-visits the concern after 2 weeks of the
PARDO to 2-3 abcences per rating period 4-Visits the Parents and successfully concecutive absences .
accomplish/implement the
interventions
3-Was able to limit the absences of the 3-visits the concern after 3 weeks of the
PARDO to 4-5 abcences per rating period 3-Visits the PARDO and successfully consecutive absences .
accomplish/implement the
interventions
R
Q
2-Was able to limit the absences of the 2-Visits the PARDO's relative only and 2-visits the concern after 4 weeks of the
PARDO to 6 abcences per rating period partially accomplish/implement the concecutive absences .
interventions
1-Was able to limit the absences of the PARDO

1-No action taken
to once every week per rating period
1-Visits the only the place of the
PARDO/concern
R
Q
5-Accomplished 4 projects 1.
Homeroom Project 2. Sponsor
5-If the projects were accomplished on
Feeding Prog 3. recruit candidate for 5-100% completion of the project
before Dec. 2017
fund raising 4. Solicited Project for
improvement
4-Accomplished 3 of the projects

1. Homeroom Project 2. 4-90-99% completion of the 4-If the projects were accomplished on
Sponsor Feeding Prog 3. recruit project(almost complete) or before January 2018
candidate for fund raising
3-Accomplished 2 of the projects

3-70-89% completion of the 3-If the projects were accomplished on
1.Homeroom Project 2. recruit
project(partially completed) or before February 2018
candidate for fund raising
R
Q
2-Accomplished 1 of the projects 2-20 to 69% completion of the 2-If the projects were accomplished on
1. Homeroom Project project(started) or before March 2018
1-None of the project were Accomplished 1-0-19% completion of the project(not 1-If the projects were accomplished on
yet started) or before before 2018
OVERAL RATING FOR

0
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0.0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0.0

Approving Officer
Individual Performance Commitment and Review F
Position: Position:
Bureau/Center/Service/DivisDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Weight per
MFO: BASIC
EDUCATION
SERVICES
Professional
Growth and
June-April
Development Conducts at least one 5%
action research.
20%
June-April
Conducts at least one 5%
action research. Weight per
Participate in
seminars, workshops,
trainings within a year
June-April
10.0%
June-Ap
10.0%
Weight per
Serve as coach, trainor

within the school year
June-April
5.0%
Weight per
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
and Review Form
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
TO
R
Q
5-Conducted a completed action

research and have presented in at least 5-100% completion of the action 5-If the action research project was
in the Division Level Research research completed on or before Nov. 2017
Conference/Summit
4- Conducted a completed action

research and have presented in at least 4-90-99% completion of the action 4-If the action research project was
researchproject(almost complete) completed on 2018
in the District Level Research or before January.
Conference/Summit
3- Conducted a completed action
research but have not presented the 3-70-89% completion of the action 3-If the action research project was
result in any level of research researchproject(partially completed on or before March
conference/summit completed) 2018
R
Q
2-Proposed an action research.
2-20 to 69% completion of the 2-If the action research project was
action project(started) completed on or before April 2018
1-Conceptualize an action research

1-0-19% completion of the action 1-If the action research project was
started but not completed on or
project(not yet started) before March 2018
5-Attended 4 or more seminars, 5- Echoed the attended seminar,
workshops trainings on which one workshop, training to teachers
of it is up to regional level within 2 1/2 months or quarter
5-Attended at least two (2) seminar,
workshop, training and echoed to
teachers in an excellent way with
documentation
4- Attended at least one seminar, 4-Attended 3 or more seminars,
workshop training and echoed to workshops trainings on which one 4- Echoed the attended seminar,
teachers in an excellent way with of it is up to regional level workshop, training to teachers
documentation within 6 months or semester
3- Attended 3 seminars, workshops 3-Attended 2 or more seminars,

trainings but failed to echo to teachers workshops trainings up to division
level 3- Echoed the attended seminar,
workshop, training to teachers
within the two semesters
R
Q
2-Attended at least two seminars, 2-Attended 2 or more seminars,
workshops trainings but failed to echo workshops trainings in which one
to teachers. of it is at least up to cluster level 2- Echoed the attended seminar,
workshop, training to teachers
within the school year
1-Attended 1 or more seminars, 1-

2-Attended at one seminar, Echoed the attended seminar,
workshops trainings in school level workshop,
workshop, training but failed to training to teachers
echo to teachers. within the month in informal form
5- Coach, trained pupils as first and 5- coached, trained pupils in at 5- Coached, trained pupils five
second place least 4 activities times in a year
4- Coached, trained pupils as second 4- Coached, trained puoils at least 4- Coached, trained pupils four
and third place 3 activities times in year
3- Coached, trained pupils as third 3- Coached, trained puoils at least 3- Coached, trained pupils thrice a
place 2 activities year
2- Coached, trained pupils as fourth 2- Coached, trained pupils at least 2- Coached, trained pupils twice a
place below 1 activity year
1-Never coached, trained pupils at all 1- Never coached, trained pupils 1- Never coached pupils at all
at all
R
Q
OVERAL RATING FOR

0
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0.0

Approving Officer

Position: Position:
Review Period: 2017-2018 Date of Review:
Weight per
MFOs KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE
KRA
MFO: BASIC
EDUCATION
SERVICES
Guided teachers on the

performance of duties
INSTRUCTIONAL
and responsibilities
SUPERVISION (15)
une-April
5%
INSTRUCTIONAL
and responsibilities
SUPERVISION (15)
June-April
Weight per
KRA
5%
Weight per
KRA
Check Lesson plans of

teaxhers from kinder to
grade six
June-April
5%
Weight per
KRA
Conducted
June-March
Mentoriong/Coaching 5%
Activities
Weight per
KRA
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
view Form
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
TO
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ACTUAL R

(Quality) (Efficiency) (Timeliness) RESULTS Q
5-All teachers were reminded of their duties 5-100% of the teachers were
and reponsibilities guided 5-Guided immediately
4-Guided teachers two when
weeks after
4-85 to 99% of the teachers were reminded needed the problem
noticing
of their duties and reponsibilities 4-85 to 99% were guided
4-85 to 99% of the teachers were reminded
of their duties and reponsibilities 4-85 to 99% were guided 4-Guided teachers two weeks after
noticing the problem

of their duties and reponsibilities 3-74 to 84% were guided 3-Guided teachers one month after

of their duties and reponsibilities 2-65 to 74% were guided 2-Guided teachers one semester after
1-64 % and below of the teachers were

reminded of their duties and reponsibilities 1-only 64% were guided 1-Never guided any teacher
5-All parts of the Teachers leson plan/ log 5-Checked lesson plans/logs of all 5-Checked lesson plan/log of 7
were properly checked teacchers in a week teachers once a week
4-Lesson log/plans of teachers were 4-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

partially checked 4-checked lessonplan of 5 to 6 teachers once a 2 week
teachers only
3-Only 2 parts of the lesson log/plan were 3-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

checked 3-checked lessonplan of 3 to 4 teachers once a 2 week
teachers only
2-Only 1 parts of the lesson log/plan were 2-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

checked 2-checked lessonplan of 1 to 2 teachers once in month
teachers only
1-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

1-Never checked the teachers lesson plan
1-No one of the teachers' plan were teachers once in a semester
checked
5-Conducted frquent coaching and

5- Conducted mentoring/coaching to all / 5-Conducted coaching and mentoring 4
mentoring to teachers who are in need
100% of teachers teachers in a week
of assistance within a week.

4-Conducted mentoring/coaching to 84- 4-Conducted coaching and mentoring 3
99% of the teachers teachers in a week
of assistance after a week.

3-Conducted mentoring/coaching to 68- 3-Conducted coaching and mentoring 2
of assistance after 2 weeks.

2-Conducted mentoring/coaching to52to 2-Conducted coaching and mentoring 1
of assistance after one weeks.
1- 0-19% completion of the 1- never coach or mentor any teacher

1-No evidence of coaching/mentoring
project(not yet started) in a week
OVERAL RATING FOR

0
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0 0.0
RATING
SCORE*
E T Ave.
0.0

Approving Officer

Position: TEACHER III Position:
Bureau/Center/Service/DivisioDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Weight
MFOs KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE per KRA
MFO: BASIC Plus

EDUCATION Factor 5% 5%
SERVICES
June-March
#RSH#
Weight
#RSH#
Weight
Ratee
#RSH#
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
TO BE FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
RATING
ACTUAL
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Quality, Efficiency,Timelines) RESULTS
Q E T
5- OUTSTANDING
Attained 5 indicators with documents

5 5 5
4- Satisfactory
3-Satisfactory
2-Unsatisfactory
#RSH#
RATING
ACTUAL
Q E T
1-Poor
OVERAL RATING
FOR
ACCOMPLISHME
NTS
#RSH#
RATING
ACTUAL
Q E T
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater Approving Officer
#RSH#
URING EVALUATION
RATING
SCORE*
Ave.
5 0.25
#RSH#
RATING
SCORE*
Ave.
0.25
#RSH#
RATING
SCORE*
Ave.
Approving Officer
#RSH#
COMPETENCIES
CORE BEHAVIORAL COMPETENCIES

improve performance. Examples may include doing something better,
Self-Management faster, at alower cost, more efficiently; or improving quality, costumer
satisfaction, morale, without setting any specific goal.
1 Sets personal goals and direction, needs and development. 4
Undertakes personal actions and behaviors that are clear and Teamwork
2 3.2
purposive and takes into account personal goals and values 4 1 4
Willingly does his/her share of responsibilty.
congruent to that of the organization.
2 Promotes collaboration and removes barriers to teamwork and goal
Displays emotional maturity and enthusiasm for and is challenged by 3 accomplishment across the organization 3 3.4
3
higher goals
Prioritize work tasks and schedules (through gantt charts, checklists, 3
4 3
Applies negotiation principles in arriving at win-win agreements.
3
etc.) to achieve goals.
5 Sets high quality, challenging, realistic goals for self and others 2 4 4
Drives consensus and team ownership of decisions.
5
Works constructively and collaboratively with others and across
Professionalism and Ethics 3
organizations to accomplish organizational goals and objectives.
Demonstrates the values and behavior enshrined in the Norms of Service Orientation
Conduct and Ethical Standards for public officials and employee (RA 1
1 6713). Can explain and articulate organizational directions, issues and problems.
4 4
2
Practices ethical and professional behavior and conduct taking into
2 3.6 Takes personal responsibilty for dealing with and/or correcting costumer 3
account the impact of his/her actions and decisions. 3 service issues and concerns 3
3
Maintains professional image: being trustworthy, regularity of
3 Initiates activities that promotes advocacy for men and women
attendance and punctuality, good grooming and communication. 3
4 empowerment.
4
Participates in updating of office vision, mission, mandates & strategies
4 Makes personal sacrifices to meet the organization's needs.
3 based on DepEd strategies and directions. 3
Acts with a sense pf urgency and responsibility to meet the 5
Develops and adopts service improvement programs through simplified
5 organization's needs, improves systems and help others improve
procedures that will further enhance service delivery. 2
their effectiveness. 4
Result Focus Innovation
1 Examines the root cause of problems and suggests effective solutions.
Achieves results with optimal use of time and resources most of the
1 Fosters new ideas, processes, and suggests bettter ways to do things (cost
time. 3 3
and/or operational efficiency).
2
Avoids rework, mistakes and wastage through effective work Demonstrates an ability to think "beyond the box". Continuously focuses on
2
methods by placing organizational needs before personal needs. improving personal productivity to create higher value and results. 3
3
Delivers error-free outputs most of the time by conforming to 3
standard operating procedures correctly and consistently. Able to
Promotes a creative climate and inspires co-workers to develop original
3 produce very satisfactoy quality of work in terms of 3.2 3
ideas or solutions.
usefulness/acceptability and completeness with no supervision
required. 3 4
Expresses a desire to do better and may express frustration at waste 4
Translates creative thinking into tangible changes and solutions that improve the work unit and
4 or inefficiency. May focus on new or more precise ways of meeting organization.
goals set. 4 2
5 Uses ingenious methods to accomplish responsibilties. Demonstrates resourcefulness and the
5 Makes specific changes in the system or in own work methods to
3 ability to succeed with minimal resources. 3
5 - Role Model; 4 - Consistently demonstrates; 3 - Most of the time demonstrates; 2 - Sometimes demonstrates; 1 - Rarely demonstrates
DEPED RPMS form - DEPED form -Teachers
CORE SKILLS Computer / ICT Skills
Oral Communication Prepares basic compositions ( e.g., letters, reports, spreadsheets and
1 graphic presentations using Word Processing and Excel. 2
Identifies different computer parts, turns the computer on/off, and work on 2.2
1 Follows instructions accurately. 3.4
a given task with acceptable speed and accuracy and connects computer
4 2 peripherals ( e.g., printers, modems, multi-media projectors, etc.) 3
2 Expresses self clearly, fluently and articulately. 3 3 Prepares simple presentations using Powerpoint. 2
Utilizes technologies to : access information to enhance professional
3 Uses appropriate medium for the message. productivity, assists in conducting research and communicate through local
3 4 and global professional networks. 2
4 Recommends appropriate and updated technology to enhance productivity
Adjust communication style to others. 3 5 and professional practice. 2
5 Guides discussions between and among peers to meet an objective. 4
Written Communication
Knows the different written business communication formats used in
1 the DepEd. 3
Writes routine correspondence/communications, narrative and

descriptive report based on ready available information data with 3
minimal spelling or grammatical error/s (e.g. Memos, minutes, etc.)
2 3 OVERALL COMPETENCY RATINGS
Secures information from required references (i.e., Directories,
3 schedules, notices, instructions) for specific purposes. 3 CORE BEHAVIORAL COMPETENCIES 3.11
Self-edits words, numbers, phonetic notation and content, if
4 necessary. 3
Demonstrates clarity, fluency, impact, conciseness, and effectiveness
5 in his/her written communications. 3 OVERALL RATING 3.11
5 - Role Model; 4 - Consistently demonstrates; 3 - Most of the time demonstrates; 2 - Sometimes demonstrates; 1 - Rarely demonstrates
Note: These ratings can be used for the developmental plans of the employee.
DEPED RPMS form - DEPED form - For Teachers

PART III: SUMMARY OF RATINGS FOR DISCUSSION
Final Performance Results Rating
Accomplishments of KRAs and Objectives
ADJECTIVAL RATING
0.25OUTSTANDING
Employee-Superior Agreement
The signatures below confirm that the employee and his/her superior have agreed to the contents of the performance as captured in this form.
Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Superior: JOCELYN B. AGTONTON

Signature: Signature:
Date: Date:
PART IV: DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Action Plan
Strengths Development Needs (Recommended Developmental Timeline Resources Needed
Intervention)
MARJORIE D. PILON JOCELYN B. AGTONTON

Ratee Rater Approving Officer
DEPED RPMS form - DEPED form -For Teacher |

Name of EmployeMARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

Position: TEACHER III Position:
Bureau/Center/SeDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Weight per
MFO:
BASIC
EDUCATIO
N Professional
SERVICES Growth and Conducts at least
10%
Development one action Every quarter
research.
Weight per
Visited
parents of
students
needing
academic
monitoring/foll
ow-up
As needed 10%
Weight per

Undertaken/ini
tiated
projects/event
s/activities
with external
funding/spons
orship
June-March 10%
MARJORIE D. PILON
Ratee
ual Performance Commitment and Review Form
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Principal I
E FILLED DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED DURING EVALUATION
RATING
ACTUAL
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Quality, Efficiency,Timelines) SCORE*
RESULTS
Q E T Ave.
5- OUTSTANDING
100% and above accomplishment with set agreements met
0 0
4- Satisfactory
85-99% of planned meetings conducted producing only set agreements and partial accomplishment of these
3-Satisfactory
75-84% of planned meetings conducted producing set of agreements
2- UNSATISFACTORY
65-74% of planned meetings conducted with minimal results
1-POOR
64% and below of planned meetings conducted with no results
RATING
ACTUAL
RESULTS
Q E T Ave.
5- OUTSTANDING
0 0
100% and above accomplishment of set visits successful interventions
4- VERY SATISFACTORY
85-99% accomplishment of visits with partial success in implementation of interventions

3- SATISFACTORY
75-84% accomplishment of visits with suggested planned interventions

2-UNSATISFACTORY
65-74% accomplishment of visits with planned interventions

1-POOR
64% and below accomplishment with no interventions

RATING
ACTUAL
RESULTS
Q E T Ave.
5-OUTSTANDING
0 0
100% and above project accomplishment with full documentation report on completion
4- VERY SATISFACTORY
85-99% project accomplishment with partial completion

3-SATISFACTORY
75-84% project initiative only with no completion report

2-UNSATISFACTORY
65-74% project initiative only with no completion report

1-POOR
No project/event/activity initiated
0
0
OVERAL RATING
FOR
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Rater Approving Officer
PART III: SUMMARY OF RATINGS FOR DISCUSSION
Final Performance Results Rating
Accomplishments of KRAs and Objectives
ADJECTIVAL RATING
0.25
OUTSTANDING
Employee-Superior Agreement
The signatures below confirm that the employee and his/her superior have agreed to the contents of the performance as captured in this form.
Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Superior: JOCELYN B. AGTONTON

Signature: Signature:
Date: Date:
PART IV: DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Action Plan
Strengths Development Needs (Recommended Developmental Timeline Resources Needed
Intervention)
Prepared DLL including Visited parents of students needing academic

adequate and updated monitoring/follow-up Identify pupiswho need visitation at least
Instructional materials with in every quarter and conduct home visitation as
the rating period needed As needed Monitoring tool
Transportation
Facilitated learning through

functional DLL and innovative
teaching strategies
Conducted regular/periodic PTA

meetings/conferences
MARJORIE D. PILON JOCELYN B. AGTONTON
Ratee Rater Approving Officer
DEPED RPMS form - DEPED form -For Teacher |

Ipcrf Marjo .S

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ipcrf Marjo .S

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

POSITION AND COMPETENCY PROFILE PCP No.

_________ Revision Code: 00

Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

MFOs KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE Weight per KRA

MFO: BASIC Teaching- Prepared more than

* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Quality) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Efficiency) PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Timeliness)

5-Adequate and appropriate used of

4-Inadequate and appropriate used of

3-Inadequate and less appropriate used

OVERAL RATING FOR

JOCELYN B. AGTONTON DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

Conducted functional and

* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned

4- Used both reflective and 4- Used 3 types of assessment for 3

3- Used appropriate and less 3- used both reflective and

1- Not appropriate and systematic

5- Remediation/ Enrichment 5- Conducted Remediation every

3- Less functional and effective 3- Remediation/ Enrichment

2- Conducted remediation for 1

OVERAL RATING FOR

DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned

5-Able to deliver 98 t0 100% of the

3- Able to deliver 87 t0 92% of the

2-Able to deliver 82 t0 86% of the

1-Able to deliver 77 t0 81% of the

1-Was able to limit the absences of the PARDO

4-Accomplished 3 of the projects

3-Accomplished 2 of the projects

OVERAL RATING FOR

DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Serve as coach, trainor

* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned

5-Conducted a completed action

4- Conducted a completed action

1-Conceptualize an action research

3- Attended 3 seminars, workshops 3-Attended 2 or more seminars,

1-Attended 1 or more seminars, 1-

OVERAL RATING FOR

DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater:

Guided teachers on the

Check Lesson plans of

* Toget the score, the rating is multiplied by th weight assigned

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ACTUAL R

3-75 to 84% of the teachers were reminded

2-65 to 74% of the teachers were reminded

1-64 % and below of the teachers were

4-Lesson log/plans of teachers were 4-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

3-Only 2 parts of the lesson log/plan were 3-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

2-Only 1 parts of the lesson log/plan were 2-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

1-Checked lesson plan/log of 7

5-Conducted frquent coaching and

4-Conducted frquent coaching and

3-Conducted frquent coaching and

2-Conducted frquent coaching and

1- 0-19% completion of the 1- never coach or mentor any teacher

OVERAL RATING FOR

DANTE J. MARCELO, CESE

Name of Employee: MARJORIE D. PILON Name of Rater: