UNDERSTANDING THE RIGORS OF PERFORMANCE-BASED BONUS:

AN ACTION PLAN TOWARDS A PBB-COMPLIANT

STATE UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES (SUCs)

April Z. Luzon
PhD Public Administration

Introduction

President Rodrigo R. Duterte called for a government equipped with political

will and braced by a concerned citizenry to be able to overcome the problems
facing the country through collective purpose and collaborative actions. He
emphasized the need for heightened transparency and deeper accountability to
the Filipino people to fight corruption and cleanse the bureaucracy.

Hence, among his priorities is to ensure citizen-centric public service to

bring the government closer to people with the citizenry empowered to evaluate
and give feedback on public services and the bureaucracy, especially on frontline
transactions. He reiterated his directive to all government offices to quickly
respond and yield meaningful results in streamlining processes, working more
efficiently, and providing high quality and genuine public service that Filipinos
deserve without delay and bureaucratic red tape. He underscored the
responsibility of each public servant to act with commitment and urgency in
protecting and serving the values, welfare and well-being of every Filipino.

The President likewise declared confidence in strengthening the country’s

foundation for a matatag, maginhawa at panatag na buhay that Filipinos aspire for.
The FY 2018 National Budget represents the sound priorities and programs aimed
at fostering the golden age of infrastructure, secure peace and order, and
accelerate human capital development for sustained and inclusive growth. To this
goal, he called for efficient, responsible and disciplined utilization of the National
Budget.

To tighten the advocacy for intensified public accountability, heightened

transparency, stronger fiscal discipline, and more efficient government processes,
the government is leveraging the priorities of its Results-Based Performance
Management System (RBPMS) and its people-centered Performance-Based
Incentive System (PBIS) through requirements and conditions aiming to fight
corruption, achieve higher citizen satisfaction and implement a firmer validation
process to recognize outstanding performance in government service.

Coverage

The Performance-Based Bonus covers all Departments, Bureaus, Offices

and Other Agencies of the National Government, including Constitutional
Commissions, Congress, The Judiciary, Office of the Ombudsman, State

1
Universities and Colleges (SUCs), Government-Owned and Controlled
Corporations (GOCCs), Local Water Districts (LWDs) and Local Government Units
(LGUs).

Eligibility Criteria

Each agency must satisfy the following conditions to be eligible for the grant of
PBB:
a. Good Governance Conditions: Satisfy 100% of the Good Governance
Conditions set by the AO25 Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF);
b. Physical Targets of Agencies: Achieve each one of the Physical
Targets, Support to Operations (STO) and General Administration and
Support Services (GASS)

Good Governance Conditions. The AO 25 IATF sets the following GGCs

based on performance drivers of the RBPMS and the priorities of the Duterte
Administration for 1) heightened transparency, 2) stringer public accountability,
and 3) more inclusive and people-centered public service:

a. Maintain/Update the agency Transparency Seal. The TS logo at the

homepage of each of the agencies’ website should indicate the
following:
1. Agency’s mandate and functions; names of its officials with their
position and designation, and contact information;
2. Annual Financial Reports;
3. DBM approved Budget and Corresponding Targets for the current
year;
4. Major Programs and Projects, Beneficiaries and Status of
Implementation for the current year
5. Annual Procurement Plan
6. Quality Management System (QMS) Certification to ISO 9001:2015
issued by any of the certification bodies accredited by the
International Accreditation Forum (IAF) members or similar
standards relating to Total Quality Management (TQM), e.g.
Philippine Quality Awards, ISO/IEC 17025, ISO 17020, and
Omentum Accreditation Canada, of at least one core process or
frontline service.
7. System of Agency Ranking Delivery Units for the year
8. The Agency Review and Compliance Procedure of Statements and
Financial Disclosures
9. The Final People’s Freedom to Information (FOI) Manual signed by
the head of agency; Agency Information Inventory; FOI Registry
10. Others as may be mandated by the AO 25 IATF

b. Post/Update the PhilGEPS posting of all invitations to Bids and

awarded contracts pursuant to the Government Procurement Reform

2
 Act (RA No. 9184) for transactions from November 16, 2018 to January
31, 2019.
c. Maintain/Update the Citizens’s or Service Charter or its equivalent
reflecting the agency’s enhanced service standards for all its frontline
services to citizens, businesses, and government agencies, consistent
with the objectives of the Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007 (RA No. 9485), and
the President’s directive to reduce processing time of all public
transactions with government, and ensure accessible and convenient
delivery of services to the public, as reiterated in CSC Memorandum No,
14 s. 2016

Performance Targets

With respect to the Physical Targets, the AO 25 IATF sets the following
requirements to strengthen the performance of departments and agencies in
efficiently providing public services.

a. STO Target. Certification/ Re-Certification of the QMS for at least 1

core processes or frontline service as mandated under its existing
pertinent laws.

For the ISO 9001:2015 QMS Certitication, it must be issued by any of

the certification bodies accredited by the International Accreditation
Forum (IAF) members. Preferably, the CB is accredited by the
Philippine Accreditation Bureau under the Department of Trade and
Industry, which is the Philippine Accreditation Body of the IAF. ISO
9001:2015 QMS equivalent certifications/attestations granted by similar
internationally recognized bodies promoting Total Quality Management
(TQM) shall be considered, e.g. Philippine Quality Award, ISO/IEC
17025, ISO 17020, and Omentum Accreditation Canada.

The certification must be valid until the last day of the year or a later
date, and must be posted in the agency TS page not later than the last
day of the year.

b. GASS Targets. The common GASS tragets shall include the following:

1. Budget utilization Rate, which shall consist of:

1.a Obligations BUR computed as obligation rates for

Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) and
Capital Outlays (CO) of all programs, activities, and projects
funded in FY 2018 from all appropriation sources, including those
released under the GAA as the allotment order policy, net of
savings from procurement, and implementation of cost-cutting
measures, and

3
 1.b. Disbursement BUR which is measured by the ratio of total
disbursements (cash and non-cash, excluding Personnel
Services) to total obligations for MOOE and Capital Outlay for the
yeae, net of goods and services obligated by December 31 but
accounts payable and not yet due and demandable on the said
date.

2. Sustained Compliance with Audit Findings. Fully implement

30% or more of the prior years’ audit recommendations as shown
in the Report on Status of Implementation of Prior Years’
Recommendations. These recommendations will exclude the
property, Plant and Equipment (PPE)-related items of the Annual
Audit Report (AAR). Audit findings in FY 2018 should also not
recur. The objective is to improve the agency’s internal control
processes, enhance operational effectiveness, and eliminate,
resolve and remedy most, if not all, of the agency’s audit findings,
by the end of 2020.

3. Compliance with the Quarterly Submission of Budget and

Financial Accountability Reports (BFARs) Online using the
DBM Unified Reporting System (URS) 15 days after the end of
each quarter.

4. Submission of the Annual procurement Plan approved by the

Head of Procuring Entity (HOPE) to the Government
Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) in the format prescribed under
the GPPB Circular No. 07-2015 by posting it in the agency TS.

5. Undertaking of Early Procurement for at least 50% of the

value of goods and services based on the department’s
budget submitted to Congress consistent with the NEP. In
transitioning towards annual cash-based budgeting,
department/agencies should subject at least 50% of the volume
of their goods and services requirements for the FY 2020
operations to Early Procurement, short of award, from September
to December 2019.

Other cross-cutting requirements

The AO 25 IATF sets the following cross-cutting requirements:

a. Establishment and Conduct of Agency Review and

Compliance Procedure of SALN pursuant to Section 10 of the
Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and

4
 Employees (RA 6713), and CSC Resolutions Nos. 1300455 and
1500088. Each SUC shall have a SALN Review and Compliance
Committee to implement the provisions on reviewing and
complying with SALN requirements to determine whether said
statements have been submitted on time, are complete, and in
proper form.

Agency/SUCs should ensure that officials and employees

covered by RA No. 6713 submitted their 2019 SALN to the
respective repository agencies, as prescribed in the rules
provided under CSC Memorandum No. 3, s. 2015. The Agency
Review and Compliance Procedure of SALN used by the
department’s agency’s SALN and Compliance Committee should
be cascaded to all employees. The scanned copy of the same
shall be uploaded in the Agency Transparency Seal not later than
the 1st of October.

b. Comply with the Freedom of Information (FOI) program

pursuant to Executive Order No. 2, s. 2016, based on the
enhanced requirements of the Presidential Communications
Operations Office (PCOO). Agencies should comply to the
following requirements:
1) The People’s FOI Manual duly signed by the Head of the
Agency and uploaded in the agency TS page
2) The Agency Information Inventory uploaded in the agency TS
3) The 2018 and 2019 FOI Summary Report uploaded in the
agency TS
4) FOI Registry uploaded in the agency TS
5) A screenshot of the agency’s website homepage containing a
visible and functional FOI logo linked to the electronic FOI
portal (www.foi.gov.ph)

Eligibility of Individuals

The following shall be the bases for the eligibility of individuals in the
unit/department:

1. Personnel on detail to another government agency fir six (6) months or

more shall be included in the ranking of employees in the recipient
agency that rated his/her performance. Payment of the PBB shall come
from the mother agency.

2. Personnel who transferred from one government agency to another

shall be rated and ranked by the agency where he/she served the
longest. If equal months were served, he/she shall be included in the
recipient agency.

5
3. Officials and employees who transferred from government agencies that
are non-participating in the implementation of the PBB, shall be rated by
the agency where he/she served the longest; official/employee shall be
eligible for the grant of PBB on a pro-rate basis corresponding to the
actual length of service to the participating implementing agency.

4. An official or employee who has rendered a minimum of nine (9) months

of service during the fiscal year and with at least Satisfactory rating may
be eligible for the grant of PBB on a pro-rata basis corresponding to the
actual length of service rendered, as follows:

Length of Services % of PBB

8 months but less than 9 months 90%
7 months but less than 8 months 80%
6 months but less than 7 months 70%
5 months but less than 6 months 60%
4 months but less than 5 months 50%
3 months but less than 4 months 40%

The following are valid reasons for an employee who may not meet
the nine-month actual service requirement to be considered for PBB
on a pro-rata basis:

a. Being newly hired employee

b. Retirement
c. Resignation
d. Rehabilitation Leave
e. Maternity Leave and/or Paternity Leave
f. Vacation or Sick Leave with or without pay
g. Scholarship/Study Leave
h. Sabbatical Leave

5. An employee who is on vacation or sick leave, with or without pay, for

the entire year is not eligible to the grant of the PBB.

6. Personnel found guilty of administrative and/or criminal cases by final

and executory judgment in FY 2019 shall not be entitled to the PBB. If
penalty meted is only a reprimand, such penalty shall not cause the
disqualification to the PBB.

7. Officials and employees who failed to submit their 2018 SALN as

prescribed by the rules provided under the CSC Memorandum No. 3, s.
2015; or those who are responsible for the non-compliance with the
establishment and conduct of the review and compliance procedure of
SALN, shall not be entitled to the PBB

6
 8. Officials who failed to liquidate all cash advances received for the year
within the reglementary period, as prescribed in COA Circular 2009-002
dated May 18, 2009, shall not be entitled to PBB.

9. Officials and employees who failed to submit their complete SPMS

Forms shall not be entitled to PBB.

10. Officials and employees responsible for the implementation of the prior
years’ audit recommendations, QMS certifications, or posting and
dissemination of the department/agency system of ranking performance
of delivery units, shall not be entitled to the PBB of the current year, if
the agency fails to comply with the conditions.

Ranking of Delivery Units

Considering the 2018 PBB Guidelines and as set forth that PBB is in the
institutionalization phase, Department/Agencies/SUCs and their corresponding
offices/delivery units that meet the criteria and conditions of PBB shall be eligible
to the grant. Bureaus, offices, or delivery units eligible to the PBB shall be forced
ranked according to the following categories:

Ranking Performance Category

Top 10% Best Delivery Unit/s
Next 25% Better Delivery Units
Next 65% Good Delivery Units

The declarations of responsible bureaus/offices delivery units in the

completion of each critical service or other key processes shall be the basis for the
equitable performance ranking of delivery units.

When identifying and determining delivery units,

departments/agencies/SUCs performing substantive line functions, technical
services or administrative support, as reflected in the Department’s/Agency’s
organizational structure/functional chart.

The identification of the delivery unit will depend on the type of government
entity, with due consideration to its mandate, organizational level and scope of
operations, as follows:

Type of Government Entity Delivery Units

Offices
State Universities and Services
Colleges Campuses
Colleges

7
 Only personnel belonging to the eligible delivery units are qualified for the
PBB. To heighten transparency among delivery units and employees,
departments/agencies shall cascade to their employees the agency
guidelines/mechanics in ranking delivery units.

Rate of the PBB

Considering the 2018 PBB guidelines and in the absence of a recent

issuance of the Inter-Agency Task Force, the rates of the PBB for each individual
shall be based on the performance ranking of the individuals’s bureau or delivery
unit with the rate of incentive as multiple of one’s monthly basic salary as of
December 31, 2018, based on the table below:

Performance Category Multiple of Basic Salary

Best Delivery Unit 0.65
Better Delivery Unit 0.575
Good Delivery Unit 0.50

Coping with the challenges of Performance-Based Bonus

Regardless of the amount an individual may receive, the intrinsic feeling of

having the SUC/agency qualify is considered a feeling of elation among many. To
qualify, here are some of the tips that SUCs may consider.

a. MFO Indicators

To level off uniform indicators among SUCs, Program Expenditure

Classification (PREXC) for State Universities and Colleges is adopted starting FY
2018 onwards. Organizational Outcomes (OO) are determined to respond to the
demands of the community.

Programs Organizational Outcomes

Higher Education Program/Services
Advance Education Program/Services
Research Program
Extension Program/Services
Relevant and quality tertiary education
ensured to achieve inclusive growth
and access of poor but deserving
students to quality tertiary education
increased.
Higher education research improved to
promote economic productivity and
innovation
Community engagement increased

8
 To better understand the output indicators, below are formula for setting
targets based on baseline data:

OUTPUT INDICATORS

PROGRAM OUTPUT Formula for Baseline

Target for FY 2020
NAME INDICATORS Data
HIGHER 1. Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
EDUCATION undergraduate students enrolled in
students enrolled in
PROGRAM students enrolled CHED-identified and RDC- CHED-identified and
in CHED- identified priority programsRDC-identified priority
identified and (First Sem AY 2017-2018) programs (First Sem
RDC-identified AY 2019-2020),
priority programs Denominator: Total considering the effect of
undergraduate enrollment K-12 transition
(First Sem AY 2017-2018)
Denominator: Total
undergraduate
enrollment (First Sem
AY 2019-2020)
2. Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
undergraduate accredited undergraduate accredited
programs with programs valid as of Dec. undergraduate
accreditation 31, 2017 programs valid as of
Dec. 31, 2020
Denominator: Total
number of accreditable Denominator: Total
undergraduate programs number of accreditable
as of Dec. 31, 2017 undergraduate
programs as of Dec. 31,
2020
ADVANCED 1. For State Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
EDUCATION Universities: graduate students enrolled graduate students
PROGRAM Percentage of in research degree enrolled in research
graduate programs (first semester of degree programs (first
students enrolled AY 2017- semester of AY 2018-
in research 2018)Denominator: 19)Denominator:
degree programs Number of graduate Target number
students enrolled in all graduate students
graduate programs (First enrolled in all graduate
Sem of AY 2017-2018) programs (First Sem of
AY 2019-2020)

9
 For State Numerator: Number of Numerator: Target
Colleges and graduate students enrolled
number of graduate
Professional in CHED-identified or RDC
students enrolled in
Institute: identified priority graduate
CHED-identified and
Percentage of programs (first semester of
RDC identified priority
graduate AY 2017-2018)
graduate programs
students enrolled (first semester of AY
in CHED-Denominator: Number 2019-2020)
identified or
graduate students enrolled
RDC-identified in all graduate programs Denominator: Target
priority programs(First Sem of AY 2017- number graduate
2018) students enrolled in all
graduate programs
(First Sem of AY 2019-
2020)
2. Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
accredited accredited graduate accredited graduate
graduate programs valid as of Dec. programs valid as of
programs 31, 2017 Dec. 31, 2020

Denominator: Total Denominator: Total

number of accreditable number of accreditable
graduate programs valid graduate programs as
as of Dec. 31, 2017 of Dec. 31, 2020
RESEARCH Number of Number of research Number of research
PROGRAM research outputs outputs completed* within outputs completed
completed within the year (FY 2017) within the year FY
the year 2020)
For State Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
Universities: research outputs research outputs
Percentage of published in 2017 from published in 2018 from
research outputs research outputs research outputs
published in completed in FY 2015, completed in FY 2018,
internationally- 2016 and 2017 2019 and 2020
refereed or
CHED Denominator: Sum of Denominator: Sum of
recognized research outputs actual research outputs
journal within completed in FY 2015, completed in FY 2018,
the year 2016, 2017 2019 and 2020

10
 For State Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
Colleges and research outputs research outputs
Professional presented from research presented in FY 2018
Institute: outputs completed in FY fromf research outputs
Percentage of 2015, 2016 and 2017 completed in FY 2018,
research outputs 2019, 2020
presented in Denominator: Sum of
national, research outputs Denominator: Sum of
regional, and completed in FY 2015, actual research outputs
international 2016, 2017 completed in FY 2018,
forums within 2019, 2020
the year
EXTENSION 1. Number of 2017 accomplishment Target for FY 2020
PROGRAM trainees
weighted by the
length of training
2. Number of 2017 accomplishment Target for FY 2020
extension
programs
organized and
supported
consistent with
the SUC's
mandated and
priority programs
3. Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
beneficiaries who beneficiaries who rated the beneficiaries who rated
rate the training training course(s) and as the training course(s)
course/s as satisfactory or higher and as satisfactory or
satisfactory or (SY 2017). higher (SY 2020)
higher in terms of
quality and Denominator: Total Denominator: Total
relevance number of beneficiaries number of beneficiaries
(SY 2017) (SY 2020)

*Definition of research outputs: Research outputs may comprise any or all of

the following: 1) Completed research-based papers or articles that are published in the
CHED accredited journals or international refereed publications such as Elsevier, Scopus,
Thomson Reuters Journals; 2) Research-based papers presented in international,
national, or regional fora or conferences, including in-house conferences; 3) Inventions or
innovations, methods, composition, or processes resulting from research including utility
models with patents and copyrights, and those with patent or certification application in
process; 4) Inventions utilized and commercialized research outputs duly patented and
applied for commercial purposes or adopted for development/production/service provision.

11
 OUTCOME INDICATORS

PROGRAM OUTCOME
Baseline Data Target for FY 2018
NAME INDICATORS
HIGHER Percentage of Numerator: Total number Numerator: Total
EDUCATION first-time licensure of passers among the first- number of passers
PROGRAM exam takers that time takers in all board among the first-time
pass the licensure programs for FY 2017 takers in all board
exams programs for FY 2020
Denominator: Total
number of first-time Denominator: Total
licensure exam takers in number of first-time
all board programs for FY licensure exam takers
2017 in all board programs
for FY 2020
Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
graduates (2 graduates employed as of graduates employed
years prior) that FY 2017 out of the as of FY 2020 out of
are employed graduates in FY 2015 (i.e. the graduates in FY
Graduates of March, 2018 (i.e. Graduates of
Summer and October March, Summer and
2017) October 2018)

Denominator: Number of Denominator: Number

graduates in all programs of graduates in all
in FY 2017 (i.e.Graduates programs in FY 2018
of March, Summer and (i.e. Graduates of
October 2017) March, Summer and
October 2018)
ADVANCED 1. Percentage of Numerator: Number of Numerator: Number of
EDUCATION graduate school graduate school faculty graduate school faculty
PROGRAM faculty engaged in with plantilla positions with plantilla positions
research work engaged in research work engaged in research
applied in any of (as enumerated in the work (as enumerated
the following: indicator) as of December in the indicator) as of
a) pursuing 31, 2017 December 31, 2020
advanced
research degree Denominator: Total Denominator: Total
programs (Ph.D.) number of graduate school number of graduate
or faculty with plantilla school faculty with
b) actively positions as of December plantilla positions as of
pursuing with the 31, 2017 December 31, 2020
last three(3) years
(investigative
research, basic
and applied

12
 scientific
research, policy
research, social
science research)
or
c) producing
technologies for
13ommercializatio
n or livelihood
improvement or
d) whose
research work
resulted in an
extension
program
RESEARCH Number of Sum of research outputs Sum of research
PROGRAM research outputs utilized by industry or by outputs utilized by
in the last three other beneficiaries in FY industry or by other
years utilized by 2015, 2016 and 2017 beneficiaries in FY
the industry or by 2018, 2019 and 2020
other
beneficiaries
EXTENSION 1. Number of 2017 Accomplishment Target for 2020
PROGRAM active
partnerships with
LGUs, industries,
NGOs, NGAs,
SMEs, and other
stakeholders as a
result of extension
activities.

For State Universities and Colleges (SUCs), setting a target is not

about guessing what you can achieve. It involves knowing where you are now,
what you are trying to achieve, and determining challenging but realistic amounts
of improvement needed to get there.

SET RIGOROUS BUT ACHIEVABLE TARGETS

If you have a small amount of data you can prepare it by hand. Otherwise, you will
probably want to enter the results into a computer to make them easier to
summarize and analyze.

13
 DEFINITION CHARACTERISTICS

 Specific: what you plan to

Targets: the desired level of performance
achieve is clear
you want to see, as measured by
 Measureable: there is a
indicators, that represents success at
way to determine
achieving your outcome.
whether or not you have
achieved it
Stretch Target: challenging but realistic
 Achievable
target should be able to reach with some
 Rigorous
effort
 Timeframe is specified

Step 1: Define where you are now

Method 1 — Use Historical Data

It can be helpful to use data that your unit has already gathered to establish a
baseline, or starting point, for your target.

NOTE: It's important to carefully evaluate the historical data you're considering
using as your target baseline. Look at how the data for a particular period and see
whether there has been an abrupt change in performance. If there has been,
investigate the reasons for the change. If there were unusual circumstances during
that period (such as a recession), the figure may not be a good reference point
and you may want to consider using data from a different period to inform your
target.

Method 2 — Use External Sources

When you do not have historical data, you might consider using information from
outside data sources to benchmark, or compare your performance data with those
of other comparable universities / departments / programs (an accrediting agency’s
standards, IPEDS, etc). Then set targets that seem reasonable in light of the
benchmarking information you've gathered.

Step 2: Define what you want to achieve and by when

Remember, you want to have a delicate balance between challenging and realistic.
A stretch target is intended to "raise the bar" enough to inspire your people. But it
also must be set at a level at which your direct reports have the skills, knowledge,
and company resources required to meet the target.

"Stretch" targets usually requires significant effort to achieve. Ask yourself how
much of a stretch will motivate without causing people to become overwhelmed or
demoralized.

14
Example:
STUDENT LEARNING
ENROLMENT TARGET
OUTCOME TARGET

Scenario: baseline data is 80%

Scenario: Enrollment in your program has of graduates are employed.
increased an average of 4% over the past
three years Possible Targets for next year:
82% increase might be
Possible Targets for next year: a Minimal Target
5% increase might be a Minimal Target 85% increase might be
6% increase might be a Moderate Target a Moderate Target
7% increase might be a Stretch Target 88% increase might be
10% increase might be an Unrealistic a Stretch Target
Target 100% increase might be
an Unrealistic Target
*WARNING: It's important to carefully evaluate the historical data you're
considering using as your target baseline. Look at how the data for a particular
period and see whether there has been an abrupt change in performance. If there
has been, investigate the reasons for the change. If there were unusual
circumstances during that period (such as a recession), the figure may not be a
good reference point and you may want to consider using data from a different
period to inform your target.

Step 3: Things to consider

Timeline: Be clear about how long you need to achieve your target. Will you need
to set intermediary targets?

Example:
Scenario: Enrollment in your program has increased an average of 2% over the
past three years

Possible Target: Increase in enrollment 3% annually so that we have 70 students

by 2020

Resources: Do you have everything you will need (equipment, personnel,

processes, workspace, etc.) to achieve the target?

How can it achieved?: Can it be achieved by working harder, more resources,

improving a process, an investment in technology?

15
Consultation: Cascading targets would be easy if consultation was previously
sought with units and employees.

Monitoring of Programs, projects and Activities. Effective, consistent and

results-driven monitoring will assist State Universities and Colleges to comply with
the PBB targets. Below is a sample Monitoring Form that can be adopted by
SUCs:

A. Monitoring Form for Physical Targets

NAME OF SUC:
Delivery Unit:
_______________________________
QUARTERLY ACCOMPLISHMENTS
For the Quarter Ending ___________________

MAJOR FINAL Rate of CATCH-UP

OUTPUT PERFORMANCE TARGET ACTUAL Accomplishment PLAN FOR
TARGET
Program/Activities/ INDICATORS DATE ACCOMPLISHMENT UNMET
Projects (PAPs) TARGETS
= (d) / (b) x 100
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g)

B. Monitoring Form for Infrastructure Projects

Name of SUC: _____________

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS QUARTERLY ACCOMPLISHMENTS

For the Quarter Ending ___________________

PHYSICAL
NAME OF Total ACCOMPLISHMENT (%) FINANCIAL
PROJECT Proje Contract ACCOMPLISH REMA
Contractor VARIAN
ct Amt. MENT (% of RKS
As per Project CE
Location Cost Actual Disbursement)
GANTT Chart = (g)
minus (h)
(a) (b) (c) (e) (g) (h) (i) (j)

16
 b. Budget Utilization Rate and Reforms of Public Procurement

In response to the long standing failings in public procurement in the

Philippines, reforms have been implemented in recent years. These are contained
in the Government Procurement Reform Act of 2003 (GPRA), the Implementing
Rules and Regulations (IRR) and an extensive Procurement Manual, as well as
measures to improve the accountability of the state universities and colleges to
combat corruption and improve public service delivery.

Creating a More Competitive System of Procurement

Over the years, many of shortcomings in public procurement in the

Philippines were due to the lack of a genuinely open and competitive system of
procurement. A central aim of the GPRA and the IRR’s is to establish this, so as
to ensure value for money and fairness based on equal access. Both the GPRA
and the IRR’s stipulate open competitive bidding as the standard method of public
procurement, while the IRR’s states also that the bids and awards committees
“shall evaluate all bids on an equal footing to ensure fair and competitive bid
comparison” (COP, 2003; GOP, 2009).

Further enhancing competition are the restrictions and prohibitions placed

on the various means that could be used by procuring entities to avoid competitive
bidding. Of particular importance are the restrictions imposed on less competitive
methods of procurement mentioned above – selective bidding, shopping, direct
contracting, and negotiated procurement, as well as repeat orders and adjacent or
contiguous projects. The range of situations in which these are permissible is
narrowly and clearly defined, and entail circumstances in which it is obviously
sensible and justified to avoid competitive tendering. For example, the conditions
in which negotiated procurement is permitted, as stipulated in the IRR’s, are two
failed rounds of bidding, emergency cases, projects requiring “highly technical
consultants”, contiguous contracts, purchases involving NGO and community
participation, and small value purchases. For the most part, a clear elaboration is
provided of each of these conditions. Competition is enhanced too by the strict
prohibition on the splitting of contracts under the GPRA and its IRR’s. Splitting
involves dividing the quantity of a bulk item to be purchased into several smaller
quantities. The value of the procurement of each quantity is thus reduced to the
extent that a less a competitive form of procurement is permissible such as
shopping or direct contracting (GPPB, 2009b: 59 65, 94).

Despite the strong commitment to competition under the GPRA and its
IRR’s, restrictions still remain on access to the procurement market for overseas

17
firms. Apart from a few exceptions, for a business to be eligible to bid for the supply
of goods and to provide consultancy services, 60 percent of the ownership must
be in the hands of Philippine nationals, with a further requirement that the actual
delivery of consultancy service be undertaken by a Philippine national(s). In
tenders for infrastructure projects, it is mandated that, in most cases, 75 percent
of the ownership of the company belongs to Philippine nationals (GOP, 2009;
GPPB, 2009b: 43-45; GPPB, 2009c: 31-33; GPPB, 2009d: 34-35; GPPB, 2009e:
16).

Enhancing Procurement Planning and Budgeting

Another reform under the GPRA was to establish a mandatory framework

of procurement planning and budgeting. Hitherto, government agencies often did
not draw up detailed yearly procurement plans, since there was no legal obligation
to do so. Those that did, did not then always adhere to them. Without proper
planning, there was little way of determining whether the procurements were
compatible with the policy priorities of the procuring entity and how much of its
capital and current budgets to earmark for them. A consequence of the latter was
that approved procurements were not undertaken or projects were abandoned or
delayed for lack of sufficient funds (WB, 2003: 22, 28; GOP, 2009; GPPB, 2009a:
31-42).

As the first stage in the planning process, according to the GPRA and its
IRR’s, end-user units of a procuring entity draft a list of requested procurements
for the following financial year, including a statement of the need for each
procurement, and providing details in each case of the type and extent of the
goods, services and works to be procured, the procurement method to be adopted,
time schedules of the procurement and contract implementation, and the estimated
contract value. The list, known as the project procurement management plan, is
then submitted to the budget office of the procuring entity for its evaluation. If
approved, it is then vetted by the head of the procuring entity, following which,
subject to any amendment, it is consolidated with the plans of the other end user
units to form the annual procurement plan of the procuring entity. Once the budget
for the procuring entity has been finalized, the end- user units will be asked to
adjust their project procurement management plans in light of the funding allocated
to their programs and activities. The annual plan is then accordingly amended and
submitted to the bids and awards committee for its evaluation and approval.

Creating Greater Transparency and Standardization in Procurement

Down the years, public procurement in the Philippines has been

characterized by a lack of transparency. While the laws and regulations governing
procurement prior to the GPRA emphasized transparency, they were often ignored
or sidestepped. Although procurements were generally advertised and bid awards
published, during the procurement process itself behind the scenes influences
prevailed to ensure that a contract was awarded to a particular company, even in

18
open tenders. Alternatively re-bidding was permitted without any explicit
justification or reason, so as to allow a favored company to re-submit a price or
proposals to ensure that it secured the contract (WB, 2003: 22). Making matters
worse was the fragmentation of the procurement system. The World Bank noted
in its assessment report of 2003 that there existed a “proliferation of outdated and
fragmented laws and [a] multiplicity of uncoordinated executive issuances”. It
further commented that “at times they are inconsistent with one another” and
“constitute a source of confusion” (WB, 2003: 10-11).

The GPRA has sought to address both these issues, including transparency
and standardization amongst it guiding principles. A number of measures were
stipulated to enhance transparency. One was to allow outside observers from the
Commission on Audit and civil society to attend meetings of bids and awards
committees, and be given access to all relevant documents. This is provided for in
Section 13 which states:

To enhance the transparency of the process, the BAC

(bids and awards committee) shall, in all stages of the
procurement process, invite, in addition to the representative of
the Commission on Audit, at least two (2) observers to sit in its
proceedings, one (1) from a duly recognized private group in a
sector or discipline relevant to the procurement at hand, and the
other from a non-government organization: provided, however,
that they do not have any direct or indirect interest in the
contract to be bid out (COP, 2003).

The private group mentioned above may include for goods, a relevant
chamber of commerce, for infrastructure projects one of the recognized
associations in the construction and engineering sector, and for consulting
services a professional association such as the Philippine Institute of Certified
Public Accountants (PICPA) and the Confederation of Filipino Consulting
Organizations (GOP, 2009). A key civil society organization that has been involved
as an observer is Procurement Watch Inc, whose task is to expose corruption and
waste in procurement (Kristina & Pimentel, 2005: 42-44).

After the award of the contract, the observers individually or jointly are
required to submit a report to both the head of the procuring entity and to the Public
Procurement Policy Board. These contain their feedback on the meetings attended
and the documents examined, pointing out any irregularities that may have been
committed. It is reasoned that with outside observers the procurement process can
be independently assessed to determine if due procedures have been followed,
the method of procurement adopted is in accordance with the conditions laid down
in the GPRA and its IRR’s, and the awards made are in favor of “the lowest
calculated responsive bid” for goods and infrastructure projects or “highest-rated
responsive bid” for consulting services (Kristina & Pimentel, 2005: 43; COP, 2003;
GOP, 2009).

19
 Also in the interests of transparency, the GPRA mandated the disclosure of
the approved budget for the contract in the tender notice, with the stipulation that
any bids above that would be discarded. This is intended as well to forestall
collusion resulting in awards at abnormally high prices. The ceiling is now specified
in all tender notices, though the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank
have expressed misgivings on the grounds that normal price competition may be
distorted by such disclosure (WB, 2008: 10, 28, 34-35).

Another aspect of the procurement process introduced by the GPRA which

has promoted transparency are pre-bid conferences. Under this arrangement, the
bids and awards committee of the procuring entity meets the prospective bidders,
before bids are submitted. The purpose of the meeting is to explain eligibility
requirements, and specifications, provide clarifications in response to queries, and
where necessary to arrange on-site visits for infrastructure projects. Pre-bid
conferences are useful in the case of technically complex procurements and
reduces confusion and uncertainty on the part of bidders when they submit their
bid proposals. For contracts with an approved budget of PhP1 million (US$21,800)
or more, at least one pre-id conference is mandatory. Under that amount, any pre-
bid conference is at the discretion of the procuring entity (ADB & OECD, 2006a: 4,
8; GOP, 2009).

The most significant step to enhance transparency was the creation of a

comprehensive E procurement system, known as PhilGEPS, set up in 2007. The
expressed aim is that it becomes “the primary source of information” for
procurement, and creates “a more efficient, convenient, transparent, and open
procurement process” (Philippine Public Procurement Service [PPPS], 2009).
PhilGEPS publishes procurement laws, regulations and bidding procedures, and
announces procurement opportunities, known as bid notice abstracts, with a facility
to download bid documents. Bid notice abstracts contain information on the type
of goods, services and infrastructure project to be procured, the approved budget
ceiling for the contract, and the mode of procurement to be adopted (shopping,
open bidding etc.) and details of any pre-bid conference. The on-line portal too
discloses the name of the company awarded a contract, the reason for the award,
and the contract sum. A further provision is an E catalogue for purchasing low
value items (PPPS, 2009). However, there is no facility yet for submitting on-line
quotations and bids, although this, together with electronic payment of suppliers
and contractors, are part of the plan to expand the functionality of the E
procurement system over the next two years (WB, 2008: 9-10, 16, 18-19, 40).

Also facilitating greater transparency in the Philippines has been the

standardization of procurement procedures and the use of a generic procurement
manual (comprising five volumes), model contracts, and uniform bid documents,
The bid documents sent to the would-be bidder must comprise or state the
approved budget for the contract, invitations to apply for eligibility and to bid,
eligibility criteria, detailed technical or functional specifications, bid evaluation
criteria, information of post-qualification, conditions of contract, instructions for

20
submitting a bid, and date, time and place of both the pre-bid conference, and the
submission and opening of bids. Included too are standard bid submission forms
to be completed or signed by the bidder and returned to the procuring entity,
including forms stating price offered, detailing the technical proposal, and
indicating delivery time or completion schedule (GPPB, 2009e: 1-35).. This
contrasts with the previously fragmented and opaque procedures, instructions, and
document formats which varied from one procuring entity to another (ADB &
OECD, 2006b: 4, 6-7; Global Advice Network [GAN], 2007; WB, 2008: 6, 10, 16,
51-55). Standardization has been achieved in part by aligning the procurement
rules, procedures, manual, and bidding documents with those of the World Bank
and the ADB (WB, 2008: 51-55)

Promoting Quality and Reliability

In response to long standing concerns about the quality of the end product
and reliability of suppliers and contractors, measures to improve both were
incorporated into the GPRA and its IRR’s. Reliability refers to the likelihood of
suppliers and contractors finishing a project or completing it on schedule.

With respect to quality, the main priority has been to upgrade the standard
of consultancy services for infrastructure projects. To ensure a high caliber of
technical or design proposals, either of two methods of evaluation are used in
consultancy tenders. One is called the quality-based evaluation procedure. The
consultants submit technical or design proposals and fee offer in separate
envelopes. The technical or design proposals of each submission are numerically
rated and after a ranking is done, the highest rated bid is identified. The fee offer
of that bid is then considered, and the firm in question is then asked to negotiate a
final fee which cannot exceed either the approved budget for the contract or the
fee offered (GPPB, 2009: 58- 60). The second method of evaluation is the quality-
cost evaluation procedure. Again the consultants submit two separate envelopes
for the technical or design proposal, and the fee offer. Separate numerical ratings
are given for the technical or design proposal and the fee proposal. The fee
proposal rating is calculated based on the lowest bid scoring method, so that the
maximum rating is given to the lowest bid (100 points) with the scores of the other
bids being inversely proportional to it. The overall rating of each bid is then
calculated with a weightage of 60 to 85 per cent accorded to the rating of the
technical or design proposal and a weightage of 15 to 40 per cent given to the
rating of the fee proposal (GPPB, 2009d: 58- 61; GOP, 2009).

The evaluation of the technical or design proposals must take into account
the “plan of approach and methodology” with the emphasis on “the clarity,
feasibility, innovativeness and comprehensiveness” together with “the quality of
interpretation of project problems, risks, and suggested solutions” (GOP, 2009).
Also included in the evaluation is the caliber of personnel assigned to the project
with respect to their experience, qualifications, education and training, as well as

21
the overall experience of the firm and its “quality of performance” in similar and
other projects (GOP, 2009).

To determine if a company is reliable and equal to the task of undertaking

and completing a project, certain requirements have been incorporated into the
eligibility screening. To be eligible, the company must prove it has the financial
means to undertake the project. For this purpose, it must have completed in a
recent period (specified in the bidding documents) a similar contract worth at least
half of the approved budget for the contract under tender, or two similar contracts
which together are equal to this amount (of which one contract must be 50 percent
of this amount). In addition, the company must have a cash facility in or a credit
line certificate from an approved bank equal to 10 percent of the approved budget
for the contract, or a net financial contracting capacity (NFCC) at least equal to the
approved budget. The NFCC is a multiple of its current net worth discounted by
the value of the uncompleted portion of its on-going projects. The multiple ranges
from 10 for contracts of less than one year to 20 for contracts extending over two
years or more. To further ensure reliability, the company must declare contracts
either on-going or in the immediate future to which it is committed. This is intended
to address the concern that suppliers and contractors often are unable to complete
a project or may finish it behind schedule as a result of such commitments (GOP,
2009; GPPB, 2009c: 31-34).

To further attain high standards in public infrastructure projects, contractors

are evaluated under the Constructors Performance Evaluation System (CPES).
Ratings are given for standards of workmanship, the quality of materials used, the
progress made if an on-going project, and the timeliness of completion, regard for
environmental health and safety and the use of resources in site management.
Two overall ratings out of 1.0 are given, each as an aggregate of the individual
weighted ratings: one is given during project and the other at the end. A score
below .75 is poor, and between .75 and .82 unsatisfactory. A score between .82
and .89 is satisfactory and from .89 to .96 very satisfactory, with any score above
that rated as outstanding. The individual and aggregate ratings are taken into
account in eligibility screening and in bid evaluation in a subsequent project. As
well, they facilitate quality control during the project, and help to determine whether
the certificate of completion should be issued at the end (Construction Industry
Authority of the Philippines & Philippine Domestic Construction Board, 2009: 1-5;
GPPB, 2009c: 82-83).

Furthermore, when goods, services and works are sub-standard, the

supplier, consultant or contractor can be disqualified from public bidding for one
year, and if repeated in a subsequent contract, for two years. In the case of
consultants, this applies to producing defective designs and prescribing materials
which are “inappropriate” and “sub-standard”. Contractors may be blacklisted for
abandonment of project, tardy progress in its execution, and failure to meet other
contractual terms relating to the quality of materials and workmanship (GOP, 2009;
GPPB 2009a: 63-72; GPPB, 2009c: 58- 59).

22
 The Procurement Process

In order to systematize the procurement process, avoid confusion and

ensure transparency, GPRA (2003) and its revised Implementing Rules and
Regulations (IRR) (GPPB, 2009) require standardization of the procurement
process and forms to be used. Procurement activities have to undergo uniform
phases which include procurement planning, the bidding process or procurement
through an alternative method, contract implementation and completion, and post-
implementation and warranty period. The bidding documents shall also be
prepared using standard forms and manuals prescribed by the GPPB. Additional
documents and specifications may be prepared and required by the procuring
entity when deemed necessary to complete the information required for the bidders
to prepare and submit their bids.

Procurement Planning. The GPRA (2003) and GPPB (2009) require

linkage between procurement planning and budgeting. Government agencies are
required to prepare an Annual Procurement Plan (APP) where all procurement of
the agency shall be based.

Modes of Procurement. GPRA (2003) also requires that all procurement

shall be done through competitive bidding or public bidding which is open to
participation by any interested party. It takes 28-170 days to complete from the
pre-procurement conference, posting of advertisement on invitation to bid, pre-bid
conference, posting/payment of bid security, the receipt and opening of bids,
eligibility screening of bids, bid evaluation, post-qualification, issuance of notice of
award, posting/payment of performance security, contract signing and approval,
until the issuance of notice to proceed (GPPB, 2009).

Price and quality are often the primary consideration in procurement. In

many countries, price is considered the dominant awarding rule, followed by “value
for money” which is a broader concept that allows other criteria and oftentimes
considers life cycle/ whole life cycle costing, commonly known as “cradle to grave”
(UNEP, 2013). Several studies also advocate quality, experience and responses
to technical specifications (Singh et al., 2012, European Commission, 2011,
O’Riordan et al., 2011, and Bergman, 2011).

In the Philippines, there is a concern on the quality of product and reliability

of suppliers and contractors. To address this, the eligibility of bidders are
determined and bids are evaluated based on compliance to the required
specifications using pass or fail criteria based on the technical component of the
bid submitted. The financial capacity of the supplier or contractor is also evaluated
based on its recently completed contracts, cash facility, line of credit, or net
financial contracting capacity. Only the bids that pass the technical component will
be evaluated in terms of financial component to determine the “Lowest Calculated

23
Bid” for procurement of goods and services and “Highest Rated Bid” in case of
consulting services (GPRA, 2003, GPPB, 2009, and Jones 2011)

A Notice of Award will be issued to the winning bidder who will then post a
performance security before formally entering into a contract with the procuring
agency. Notice to Proceed will then be issued within seven days from signing of
the contract (GPRA, 2003, and GPPB, 2009).

Alternative modes of procurement such as limited source bidding, direct

contracting, repeat order, shopping, and negotiated procurement are allowed in
certain cases in order to promote economy and efficiency (GPRA, 2003, and
GPPB, 2009). These alternatives, however, involved less or no competition
(Jones, 2011), thus, can be resorted to only when specific conditions are met
(GPRA, 2003, and GPPB, 2009).

Contract Implementation and Completion. Contract implementation

commences when the procuring agency issues the Notice to Proceed to the
winning bidder (GPRA, 2003, and GPPB, 2009). A procurement contract is
considered completed when there is complete delivery in accordance with the
specifications in case of procurement of goods, supplies and materials; complete
work rendered based on the total prescribed period in case of services; time period
has lapsed or the objectives are achieved in case of consultancy; and reaching at
least 95% work done in case of infrastructure projects.

Post-Implementation and Warranty. The procurement process extends

beyond completion until the end of warranty period called the post-implementation.
Minimum warranty period shall be three months for expendable supplies, one year
for nonexpendable supplies, one year from project completion up to final
acceptance or the defects liability period for construction defects on infrastructure
projects. In case of structural defects on infrastructure projects, warranty period
shall be fifteen (15) years for permanent structures, five years for semi-permanent
structures, and two years for other structure (GPPB, 2009, and GPRA, 2003).

The Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System

(PhilGEPS). What has become PhilGEPS today had its beginnings as the Pilot
Electronic Procurement System (Pilot EPS). Over the years, the PhilGEPS has
brought significant benefits to the government in terms of the following:

1. Improved transparency in government procurement

2. Enhanced competition and realization of value for money in
procurement
3. Improved administrative efficiencies
4. Reduction on procurement costs, including newspaper advertisements
5. Provision of audit trails through information posted in the system
6. Serves as medium in implementation of government procurement
policies, transparency and good governance measures

24
 7. The expensive database of information in PhilGEPS aids government
agencies in procurement planning and monitoring

Transitioning from Obligation-Based Budgeting to Cash-Based Budgeting

Prior to FY 2019, the annual obligation-based budgets were formulated and

authorized by obligation-based appropriations, as well as by automatic
appropriations. Obligation-based appropriations authorize the delivery of
goods/services as well as payment of actual obligations (or those with contractual
agreements) without any time limit, that is, for so long as there is existing valid
contract. As a consequence, the government must provide funds to pay the
supplier upon acceptance of his deliveries even beyond the validity of the
appropriation.

The annual obligation-based budgets have contributed to the perennial

under-utilization of agency budgets. First, there is no compelling reasons for
agencies to complete the project implementation within the year since they are still
authorize to pay deliveries (arising from contracted obligations) made even after
the fiscal year. Second, due to unrealistic planning and programming, agencies’
budget may have included proposals which are either physically impossible (in
terms of magnitude and timing) to implement based on the agencies’ capacities,
or not yet ready for implementation.

Annual cash-based appropriations, on the other hand, authorize agencies

to incur contractual obligations and disburse payments for goods delivered and
services rendered and inspected only within the fiscal year. The limitation of the
period for obligation and payment is one way to motivate agencies to formulate
realistic budgets and to prod them to complete projects within the year as
budgeted. This will help avoid the adverse consequences on the provision of
public services (in terms of failure to delivery target outputs in the desired
quantities and/or delays vis-à-vis the prescribed timelines), as well as incurrence
of unnecessary financing cost.

With the shift to cash-based budgeting system, where actual delivery of

targeted programs/activities/projects is required for contractual obligations entered
into within the fiscal year, the budget, as planned and legislated, is expected to be
fully executed within the year. Hence, the FY 2019 budget exclude those
programs/projects which cannot be implemented during the budget year (i.e.,
those which are unlikely to be executed given the agencies’ implementation
capacity and those that are not implementation-ready, and those which will only
be ready for budgeting starting FY 2020.

To address, the issue on public procurement and the low budget utilization
rate, the researcher recommends the following:

25
1. In order to address the weaknesses in the SUCs procurement processes, it
is highly recommended to orient and re-orient newly hired and existing
personnel on key policies and procedures.

2. Establish mechanisms to ensure proper flow and diligent submission of

documents and records to pertinent offices, as well as proper filing and
retention of documents and records.

3. Prepare written policies and procedures and ensure its wide distribution to
University personnel.

4. Enhance and restore the document tracking system; and create a

centralized database for inventory and property management.

5. Utilize and consult experts in the University or College on matters related to

procurement, hire supply personnel to replace the retired ones, construct
warehouse equipped with basic warehousing paraphernalia.

6. Design performance evaluation specifically designed for procurement

personnel and anchored on the provisions of GPPB Circular No. 10-2012
and related guidelines.

7. Establish programs to address complaints; and establish a whistleblower

program.

8. The BAC is also recommended to create Registry of Suppliers and

encourage tested suppliers to register, prepare registry of routinely
procured items with the latest purchase cost, track requests not yet
purchased, and invite more observers aside from those regularly invited.

9. Supply and Property Office should track deliveries and undelivered items,
schedule a regular follow-up with suppliers, control issuances of supplies to
various units, and maintain stock cards for all supplies and materials. The
budget and planning offices shall also identify projects to be funded from
University/College income prior to the year of implementation.

10. Monitoring of the implementation of projects must be pro- active and not
passive. The manual shall also be reviewed, evaluated and updated
regularly to maintain conformance to pertinent laws, rules and regulations.

26
 c. Improving Public Service Delivery through Compliance to the Good
Governance Conditions

The Good Governance Conditions are based on the performance drivers of

the Results-Based Performance Management System (RBPMS) and the priorities
of the government for heightened transparency, stronger public accountability and
more inclusive people centered public service.

To ensure transparency, public accountability and people centered service,

the following actions are suggested:

1. Establish a pool of IT professionals as manpower to the College or

University’s MIS Section to monitor compliance on various Good
Governance Conditions.

2. The Transparency Seal should be managed by the MIS unit but close
coordination with the Institutional Planning Office be established to check
compliance on the mandatory requirements set forth by the Commission.

3. Establish stronger bond with other government agencies, i.e. Civil Service
Commission for the coaching and updating of Citizens Charter, Frontline
Services, SALN submission and other requirements.

4. Integrate Quality Management System (QMS) as a habit in the College of

University to effectively adapt the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) requirements.

5. Harmonize performance targets by linking SPMS and ISO Quality

Objectives to simultaneously monitor performance indicators and targets.

6. Develop a pool of Internal auditors to evaluate the systems and processes

of the College or University.

7. Track reports for submissions required by agencies on a weekly, monthly,

quarterly basis.

8. Engage employees in understanding PBB, the performance targets of their

respective departments/units, as well as the services and outputs that they
will need to deliver in order to meet the targets.

9. Disseminate the performance targets and accomplishments of the

departments/units to the employees through the intranet and other means,
as well as publish and these on websites and other forms of information
dissemination measures.

27
 10. Set up a Help Desk to respond to queries and comments on the targets and
accomplishments of their respective departments/units. The Help Desk may
be a facility that is embedded in the respective websites or through the
designated PBB Focal person of the agency. Set-up Complaints Mechanism
to respond to PBB-related issues and concerns raised by officials and
employees of their respective departments/units. Such may be a
incorporated in the functions of their Grievance Committee.

Conclusion

Performance-Based Bonus determines the efficiency and effectiveness of

any government agencies, particularly State Universities and Colleges, in bringing
services closer to the people. The accomplishments of its targets are measures
that they have indeed performed their mandate. The compliance to regulatory
bodies and mandated laws speak of its commitment to abide to laws and
regulations.

As top-up bonus, requirements have become tedious over the years since
it started in 2012. From mere 90% accomplishment of performance indicators, it
demanded 100% accomplishment on all targets and compliance to Good
Governance Conditions plus additional cost cutting requirements. Hence, to be
PBB-compliant is equivalent to hard work, dedication and commitment, and
teamwork of the employees towards the achievement of its targets.

It is for agencies (state universities and colleges) to strategize to ensure

compliance. After all, 65% of an average P30,000.00 monthly salary of a
government employee is an added bonus to sustain a man’s daily living.

28
References:

Harvard ManageMentor. (n.d.). Gathering Performance Data. Retrieved October

21, 2009 from
http://ww3.harvardbusiness.org/corporate/demos/hmm10/performance_measure
ment/set_targets.html

Phillips, L., Gray, R., Malinovsky, A., Rosowsky, M. (April 2009). The Assessment
Report: Documenting Findings and Using Results to Drive Improvement. Texas
A&M University Retrieved 10/12/09 from
http://assessment.tamu.edu/wkshp_pres/AssessReport_UsingResults.pdf

PMMI Project. (August 2005). Target Setting — A Practical Guide. Retrieved

October 21, 2009 from http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=845670

PMMI Project. (August 2005). Target Setting Checklist. Retrieved October 21,
2009 from http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=845670

29