Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form

Name of Employee: Mr. Paulo Magandangbuhay Name of Rater/s: Mrs. Paula Mahumot & Mr. Pedro Mahimsog
Position: Principal Position: PSDS & Coordinating Principal
Review Period: June, 2014-March, 2015 Date of Review: November, 2014/April, 2015
School/District: San Pablo ES, Dauis District

To be filled in during planning To be filled in during evaluation

MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Weight Performance Actual Result Rating Score
per KRA Indicators
(Quality,
Efficiency,
Timeliness)
Delivery 1. Instruction  Accounted June, 2014- 25%  Increased  Increased 5 1.25
of Basic al for learning March, 2015 school school
Education
Leadership outcomes of performance performanc
Services
schools viz-a- by 2% at the e by 2% +
viz goals and end of the sy
targets 5
 GSA is  GSA is 10
attained by attained by
75% and 75% and 10/2=5
5x.25(weight
above (ELEM) above of KRA)=1.25

(ELEM)
2. Learning  Provided June, 2014- 15%  100% and  90% 4 0.60
Environme safe and March, 2015 above accompli
4x.15(weight
nt child accomplishm shments of KRA)=0.60
friendly ents on the
learning following
and school (supported by
environme evidence
nt for such as
students/le school policy,
arners reports,
information
materials,
advocacy
activities,
regular
meetings,
inventory)

-Adhered to
Child-Friendly
environment
standards and
Programs

-Institutionalized
child protection
mechanisms
and processes
(per Deped
Order 40, s.
 2012)

-Provided ICT
facilities/worksh
op rooms as
learning support
systems

-Has clear
DRRM
mobilization
plans

3. Human  Provided June, 20%  Provided  90% of 4 0.90

Resource technical 2014- technical teachers
Managem assistance March, assistance provided
ent and to teachers 2015 to all with
Developm and to teachers technical
ent non- on matters assistance
teaching pertaining with
personnel to complete
within the enhance evidences.
RPMS cycle ment of
classroom
managem
ent, skills
and
instruction
al  Provided
competen technical
ce within assistanc
the RPMS e to all
cycle with non-
the teaching
following personne
correspon l for
ding support
evidences: services
within the +
-teacher RPMS
portfolio with
containing complet
observatio ecycle
n reports, with
developm
ental
needs
interventio
n results,
performan +
ce analysis
and
recomme
ndations
 for
developm
ent
interventio
ns.

 Provided 5
technical 9
assistance
9/2=4.5
to non- 4.5X.20(we
teaching ight of
KRA)=0.90
personnel
for support
services
within the
RPMS  Provided
cycle with technical
the assistanc
following e to all
 evidences: non-
- teaching
performan personne
ce l for
contracts, support
and services
performan with
ce complet
evaluation e
results in evidence
prescribed s.
tools.
4. Parents’  Established 15%  Has -Mobilization 5 0.71
Involveme school and stakehold plan complete
nt and family and ers with reports
Communit community partnershi and
y partnership p/mobiliza documentatio
Partnership for tion plan ns of
performan (complete meetings/agre
ce with ements +
reports
and
document
ations of
meetings,
agreemen
ts)
  Organized 4 -Organized 3 4
programs with programs with
stakeholders, stakeholders,
esp. parents esp. parents
for academic for academic
and other and other
purposes purposes
(esp.
Strategic +
planning)

 Obtained  Obtained 5
resources for resources for 14
the school the school
14/3=4.7
through through 4.7x.15(weight
stakeholders stakeholders of KRA)=0.71

partnership partnership
with
complete
records/doc
uments of its
utilization,
liquidation.

5. School Performed data-  Produced 25%  Produced  Produce 3 0.75

Leadership based strategic a school a school da
3X.25(weight
Managem planning strategic strategic school of KRA)=0.75
ent and plan/SIP plan/SIP strategic
Operations and AIP and AIP plan/SIP
through through and AIP
the the through
strategic strategic the
planning planning strategic
process: process, planning
approved process
– conduct and for
of school accepted submissio
situational by the SDS n to
analysis, DAC.
SWOT,
determinin
g
strategies
through
prioritizing
strategic
options,
resource
and
facilities
planning
and
 formulatio
n of PAPs
based of
analyses

-Strategic
Plan was
based on
Deped vision,
contextualize
d in school
vision and
mission

-all school
stakeholders
were
engaged in
the strategic
planning
process

-M&E for
process and
outcomes
checkpoints
were
 developed
and utilized

- 100% and
above
accomplishm
ent of school
targets (with
evidence
contained in
school report
card

Overall Rating for Accomplishments 4.21

* To get the score, the rating is multiplied by the weight assigned.

PPPPPPP dddddd
Rater Ratee