Personnel

SY 2010-2011

Date of Years Educational PRC Plantilla

Employee Teaching
Name Date of Birth Position Original in Attainment Eligibility License Item
Number Assignment
Appointment Service Number Number

Shiela A. Indiongco Oct 12, 1978 T-I Mar 16, 2009 1 BEEd LET 4261474 Grade I-A
AB English
Merly V. Fabian May 2, 1972 T-I Feb 15, 2010 0 LET 4261886 Grade I-B
27 Educ.Units
BEEd
Jennifer M. Bautista Oct 2, 1973 T-I Jul 1, 2008 2 LET 0605029 4261278 T1-157444-1998 Grade II
27 MA Units
BEEd
Adelaida B. Paguinto Mar 17, 1969 T-II Jun 16, 2003 7 LET 0339268 4151823 T1-157374-1998 Grade III
36 MA Units
BSEd Maj.
Maricar A. Guevarra Jan 2,1977 T-I Oct 1, 2009 1 LET 0693507 4261652 Grade IV
H.E.&Tech.
BEEd
Aristotle N. Carlos Mar 6. 1982 T-I Jun 18, 2008 2 LET 0873167 4261300 Grade V
18 MA Units
BEEd
Julie L. Lunod July 1, 1981 T-III Sep 10, 2007 3 LET 0806462 4260961 T1-17004-1998 Grade VI
MAED
BSC Relieving
Daniel C. Cortez Apr 21, 1967 T-I Jan 26, 2009 1 LET 4261475
BSEEd Teacher
BSEEd School Head
Ma. Lalaine R. De Leon Jan 17, 1965 ESHT-III Jan 15, 1989 21 PBET 0376357 4324406 HT3-150330-
MAED
1998
Situational Analysis:

The table shows that there are 8 teachers, 1 Teacher-III who is 3 years in service, 1 Teacher-II who has rendered 7 years in
service, and 5 Teacher-I, 2 of them have served 2 years, 1 year for the other 2 and the other 1 is new in the service.
Three teachers have acquired MA units. The School Head and Grade VI Teacher are MA graduates.
 NCBTS Teachers’ Strengths and Needs Assessment
(Percentage Score)
Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3 Domain 4
Name of Teacher
Ave. Ave. Ave.
S1.1 S1.2 S2.1 S2.2 S2.3 S2.4 S2.5 S3.1 S4.1 S4.2 S4.3 S4.4
D1 D2 D3
Shiela A. Indiongco 75.00 66.67 73.61 72.50 70.00 67.86 71.67 72.50 70.76 65.74 65.74 69.44 58.33 66.67 67.86
Merly V. Fabian 78.33 75.00 77.78 72.50 62.50 75.00 70.00 77.50 71.61 58.33 58.33 62.96 66.67 75.00 66.67
Jennifer M. Bautista 75.00 83.33 76.39 72.50 75.00 73.21 66.67 75.00 72.03 72.22 72.22 73.15 75.00 70.83 69.05
Adelaida B. Paguinto 76.67 83.33 77.78 97.50 70.00 75.00 75.00 55.00 74.58 77.78 77.78 81.48 75.00 75.00 69.05
Maricar A. Guevarra 75.00 66.67 73.61 77.50 70.00 64.29 70.00 70.00 69.92 67.59 67.59 68.52 66.67 70.83 70.24
Aristotle N. Carlos 65.00 75.00 66.67 75.00 55.00 60.71 73.33 65.00 66.10 62.96 62.96 72.22 75.00 66.67 57.14
Julie L. Lunod 83.33 58.33 79.17 70.00 75.00 80.36 85.00 82.50 79/24 78.70 78.70 81.48 79.17 75.00 83.33
Daniel C. Cortez 80.00 75.00 79.17 92.5 92.5 91.07 91.67 95.00 92.37 92.59 92.59 93.52 95.83 95.83 88.10

Domain 4 Domain 5 Domain 6 Domain 7

Name of Teacher
Ave. Ave. Ave. Ave.
S4.5 S4.6 S4.7 S5.1 S5.2 S5.3 S5.4 S6.1 S7.1 S7.2 S7.3
D4 D5 D6 D7
Shiela A. Indiongco 68.75 68.75 60.00 58.97 63.64 72.06 75.00 87.50 72.50 66.67 66.67 72.92 75.00 72.92 73.33
Merly V. Fabian 62.50 75.00 52.50 57.69 75.00 63.24 70.83 62.50 67.50 56.94 56.94 64.58 50.00 72.92 65.00
Jennifer M. Bautista 75.00 75.00 62.50 62.82 63.64 72.06 75.00 75.00 70.63 75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 72.92 74.17
Adelaida B. Paguinto 68.75 68.75 32.50 65.38 63.64 72.06 62.50 87.50 70.63 66.67 66.67 72.92 62.50 79.17 73.33
Maricar A. Guevarra 68.75 75.00 60.00 60.58 63.64 64.71 75.00 83.33 68.75 62.50 62.50 68.75 66.67 70.83 69.17
Aristotle N. Carlos 68.75 75.00 55.00 58.65 56.82 72.06 75.00 62.50 66.88 69.44 69.44 64.58 75.00 75.00 70.83
Julie L. Lunod 75.00 81.25 72.50 70.51 79.55 83.82 79.17 100 84.38 73.61 73.61 91.67 79.17 87.50 87.50
Daniel C. Cortez 81.25 93.75 87.50 79.81 84.09 94.12 83.33 95.83 90.00 91.67 91.67 89.58 87.50 91.67 90.00
Situational Analysis:

The table presents the percentage score of 8 teachers in the NCBTS-TSNA. It shows that out of 8 teachers, 6 have a little knowledge in the use of ICT
(D4:S4.7), %scores are 32.50%, 52.50%, 55%, 60% and 62.50%. In D5:S5.1 (Developing and utilizing creative and appropriate instructional planning), %score
of 4 teachers is 63.64 and I teacher is 56.82 which are both below the planning standard. Domain 6 (community linkages) ranks #3 among the least performed
competencies, %scores of 6 teachers are also below the planning standard which is at 75%.

Physical and Ancillary Facilities

S C H O O L Y E A R
Description
2007 – 2008 2008 – 2009 2009 – 2010
Classrooms 7 7 7
Home Economics 1 1 1
Comfort Rooms 6 6 9
Principal’s Office 1 1 1
Situational Analysis:

The table shows that there were 7 classrooms from SY 2007-2008 to SY 2009-2010 just enough for 7 classes
1 Home Economics Building, 1 Principal’s Office. 6 comfort rooms for SY 2007-2008 to SY 2008-2009
and another 3 were constructed in SY 2009-2010. Data show that there were inadequate facilities.

Usage and Condition of School Buildings

Type Description Usage Condition

DepED Building 1-room, semi-concrete Canteen Destroyed windows and door

Renovated Marcos Type 3-room, semi-concrete Grade I classrooms No ceiling and proper ventilation

PTA Building 1-room, semi-concrete Grade II Classroom Destroyed windows, floor needs elevation
No ceiling & concrete partition wall,
Renovated RPUS Building 3-room, semi-concrete Grades III-V Classrooms
destroyed windows, floors need elevation
 Multi-Purpose 1-room, semi-concrete Home Economics Dilapidated ceiling, broken windows

Congressional Building 2-room, semi-concrete Grade VI classroom & Principal’s Office In good condition
Learning Materials and Equipment

S C H O O L Y E A R
Classroom Furniture
2007 – 2008 2008 – 2009 2009 – 2010
Desks 5 0 0
Armchairs 159 159 209
Blackboards 12 12 12
Teachers Tables 4 4 6
Sound System 1 1 1
Filing Cabinet 1 1 1
Situational Analysis:
There were 159 armchairs during SY 2007-2008 to SY 2008-2009, acquired 50 in SY 2009-2010 with a total of 209armchairs for 233
pupils; 12 blackboards for the three school years; 6 teachers’ tables for 8 teachers; 1 sound system and a filing cabinet. The data
show that there is inadequate classroom furniture.

S C H O O L Y E A R
Instructional Equipment
2007 – 2008 2008 – 2009 2009 – 2010
Television Set 0 0 1
Garden Tools 0 0 0
Carpentry Tools 0 1 hammer 1 hammer
Situational Analysis:

The only instructional equipment the school has is 1 hammer.