OFFICE PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT AND REVIEW FORM

Name: JOCELYN P. BALASUELA Name of Rater: JUDITH V. ROMAGUERA

Position: Head Teacher-I/School Head Position of Rater: OIC, Assistant School Division Superintendent
Review Period: June 2018-April 2019 Date of Review: Nov. 2019
Division: DepEd-Teniapan NHS, Zamboanga del Sur

TO BE FILLED IN DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED IN DURING EVALUATION

Weig PERFORMANCE INDICATORS RATING
ht Actual
MFQ KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE Avera Score
per Result
Quality Efficiency Timeliness Q E T ge
KRA
Score
Basic 5- Outstanding: Provided result of the 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.00
Education
following MOVs: * School-based MPS * Presented all results Updated report of
Services Instructional
Quarterly test result * PHIL-IRI result( of learning learning outcomes
Leadership
Literacy level: English/Filipino, * Analysis of outcomes with quarterly 0.60
(Performance
learning outcomes against targets(quality complete and
Indicators 60%)
indicator)* Intervention to address poor accurate data
performance meeting the PS
4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 MOVs are met 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
Presented results Updated report of
of learning learning outcomes
outcomes with 1 during the 2nd
1.1 Accounted for June data missing quarter
learning outcomes of 2018-
15
schools and centers vis- April 3- Satisfactory: Only 3 MOVs are met 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
à-vis goals and targets 2019 CPresented all Updated report of
results of learning learning outcomes
outcomes with 2 during the 3rd
missing data quarter
2- Unsatisfactory: Only 2 MOVs are met 2- Unsatisfactory: 2: Unsatisfactory:
Presented some Updated report of
results of learning learning outcomes
outcomes at the end of the
school year
1- Poor: Only 1 MOV is met 1- Poor: No result of 1- Poor: No reportr
learning outcomes at all

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.60

 5- Outstanding: • Number of Checked DLPs / 5- OUTSTANDING: 5- OUTSTANDING: 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.50
DLLs of teachers highlighting integration of Supervision to 8 Supervision to 8
content knowledge within and across subject teachers per month teachers per month
areas. with approved with approved
• Number of classroom observations program and program and
conducted with at least 4 COTs per Teacher application of application of
• Consolidated report on data collected, contextualization contextualization
analyzed and utilized to identify strengths from teachers from teachers
and weaknesses of teachers during
classroom observation. 0.875
• Report on Instructional Materials utilized
highlighting learner-centered strategies that
promote literacy and or numeracy skills
• Sample Copies of summative test
materials with Table of Specification.•
Consolidated reports on learning difficulties,
home visitations and peculiar incidents used
1.2 Performed at least 8 June for planning and implementing appropriate
instructional supervision 2018- interventions
25 4- Very Satisfactory:Only 7 of the 4-VERY 4-VERY
per month to achieve April • Approved Instructional Supervisory Plan
learning outcomes 2019 enumerated items are present SATISFACTORY: SATISFACTORY:
• Copy of Approved Master Class Program Supervision to 6 Supervision to 6
• Copy of Approved Teacher’s Program teachers per month teachers per month
• List of prepared Localized/indigenized with approved with approved
Instructional Materials program program
3- Satisfactory: 7Only 6 of the enumerated 3- 3-
items are present SATISFACTORY:Supe SATISFACTORY:Supe
rvision to 5 teachers rvision to 5 teachers
per month with per month with
approved program approved program
2- Unsatisfactory: Only 5r of the enumerated 2- 2-
items are present UNSATISFACTORY: UNSATISFACTORY:
Supervision to 3 Supervision to 3
teachers per month teachers per month
with aprroved with aprroved
1- Poor: Only 4 of the enumerated items are 1-POOR: COT to 1 1-POOR: COT to 1
program program
present teacher per month teacher per month

3.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 0.88

 5- Outstanding:• Tabular / graphical Data on 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5
Internal Efficiency (Drop-out, Failure, Cohort Internal efficiency is Internal efficiency is
survival, Transition,Completion, Graduation, within the planning within the planning
1.3 Increased internal Promotion. Enrolment,Learner-Teacher ratio, standard standard
efficiency based on 0.9
planning standards: • Report on the Analysis of Performance
Gaps
• Causes of poor result e.g., High drop-out
rate, low completion rate, decrease of
4- Very Satisfactory: 10 requirements
enrolment) 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
satisfied
• Recommendations 4 of the indicators 4 of the indicators
meet the planning meet the planning
standard standard

June 3- Satisfactory: 9 requirements satisfied 3- Satisfactory: 3 of 3- Satisfactory: 3 of

2018- the indicators meet the indicators meet
20
April the planning the planning
2019 standard standard

2- Unsatisfactory: 8 requirements satisfied 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:

2of the indicators 2of the indicators
meet the planning meet the planning
standard standard

1- Poor: 5 requirement satisfied 1- Poor: All 1- Poor: All

indicatotrs do not indicatotrs do not
meet the PS meet the PS

4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.90

 5- Outstanding: • Health records of students 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
• Report on Child Protection Committee and
Policies Formulated
• Report on teacher’s non-threatening
discipline
• Report on school policy and action plan 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding:
Learning
with practice to response to emergency cases Implemented the Implemented the
Environment ( 0.20
which can provide safety to all students program whole year program whole year
10%)
• Report on measures and guidelines round starting June round starting June
adopted to protect children from abuse and
exploitation
• Report on Child Abuse
• Disaster Risk reduction Management Plan

4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 interventions 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:

were met Implemented the Implemented the
program whole year program whole year
round starting July round starting July
2.1 Ensure safe and child- June
friendly learning and 2018-
4
school environment for April
learners 2019 3- Satisfactory: Only 3 interventions were
3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
met
Implemented the Implemented the
program whole year program whole year
round starting round starting
August August

2- Unsatisfactory: Only 2 interventions were 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:

met Implemented the Implemented the
program whole year program whole year
round starting round starting
September September
1- Poor-Only 1 intervention was met 1- 1-
Poor:Implemented Poor:Implemented
the program whole the program whole
year round starting year round starting
October October

5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 0.20

 5- Outstanding:• Report on WASH Program 4 5 4.5 4.5
• Status report on feeding Program
• Report on National Drug Education Program
(NDEP), “Barkada Kontra Droga”
• Report on Equipment for recreation and
sports
• Number of classrooms with proper 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding:
ventilation and lighting and enough space. Implemented the Implemented the
0.18
• Number of classrooms and premises program whole year program whole year
regularly maintained and cleaned. round starting June round starting June
• School Policy against discrimination with
regard to gender, cultural origin, social
status, religious beliefs and others.
• Number of Functional Toilets
• Report on Canteen Operation

4 Very Satisfactory: Repaired 90-99%% of all 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:

instructional and other ancillary facilites with Implemented the Implemented the
accurate and complete (Prog. Of Works, program whole year program whole year
financial accomplishments, PTR) round starting July round starting July
June
2.2 Improved the school
2018-
plant, physical facilities, 4
April
safety and sufficiency
2019
3- Satisfactory: Repaired 80-90%% of all
instructional and other ancillary facilites with 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
accurate and complete (POWs, financial Implemented the Implemented the
accomplishments, PTR) program whole year program whole year
round starting round starting
August August

2- Unsatisfactory: Repaired 40-59% of all

2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
instructional and other ancillary facilites with
Implemented the Implemented the
accurate and complete (POWs, financial
program whole year program whole year
accomplishments, PTR)
round starting round starting
September September
1- Poor: Repaired 49% and below of all 1- 1-
instructional and other ancillary facilites with Poor:Implemented Poor:Implemented
accurate and complete (POWs, financial the program whole the program whole
accomplishments, PTR) year round starting year round starting
October October

4 5 4.5 4.5 0.18

 5- Outstanding: • School Title / Tax 5- Outstanding: Hard 5- Outstanding: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Learning 2. 3. Improved school site
Declaration/Deed of Donation/survey/ copy of the 5 Hard copy of the 5 0.08
Environment ownership
documents documents
4- Very Satisfactory: 4 out of 5 indicators are 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
met Hard copy of the 4 Hard copy of the 4
June documents documents
2018- 3- Satisfactory: 3 out of 5 indicators are met 3- Satisfactory: Hard 3- Satisfactory: Hard
2
April copy of the 3 copy of the 3
2019 2- Unsatisfactory: 2 of 5 indicators are met 2- Unsatisfactory:
documents 2- Unsatisfactory:
documents
Hard copy of the 2 Hard copy of the 2
documents documents
1- Poor: 1of 5 indicators met 1- Poor: No copy of 1- Poor: No copy of
all documents all documents

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.08

5- Outstanding: • Number of Accomplished 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 3 4 3.5 3.5
Classroom Observation Tool (COT) Whole year round Whole year round
• Approved Technical Plan starting June starting June
• Approved school LAC Plan
Human Resource
• SLAC Implementation report highlighting
Management
enhancement of classroom management 0.14
Development
skills and instructional competence
(10%)
• Technical Assistance Report
• Number and types of LIS generated School
3.1 Strengthen technical forms checked.
assistance to teachers on
June 4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 of the indicators 4 - Very Satisfactory: 4 - Very Satisfactory:
matters pertaining to
2018- are complied Whole year round Whole year round
enhancement of 4
April starting July starting July
classroom management
2019
skills and instructional 3- Satisfactory: Only 3of the indicators are 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
competence complied Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting July
2- Unsatisfactory: Only 2 of the indicators are 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
complied Whole year round Whole year round
starting September starting September
1- Poor: Only 1 indicator was complied 1- Poor: Whole year 1- Poor: Whole year
round starting round starting
October and beyond October and beyond

3 4 3.5 3.5 0.14

 5- Outstanding: • Accomplished Classroom 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 3.0 4.0 3.5 3.5
Observation Tool (COT) Whole year round Whole year round
• Approved school LAC Plan starting June starting June
• SLAC Implementation report highlighting
instructional competence
• Accomplished Attendance Sheet of
Teachers attending LAC session
• Completion Report of school-based INSET 0.11
conducted
• List of INSET Attended
• List of teachers provided mentoring /
coaching, peer tutoring and other forms of
interventions

4- Very Satisfactory: Only 3 of the 4 - Very Satisfactory: 4 - Very Satisfactory:

requirements are satisfied Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting July
June
3.2. Improved teachers' 2018-
3
instructional competence April
2019 3- Satisfactory: Only 2 of the requirements 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
satisfied Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting July

2- Unsatisfactory: Only 1 of the requirements

satisfied
2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
Whole year round Whole year round
starting September starting September

1- Poor: Never established an award 1- Poor: Whole year 1- Poor: Whole year
mechanism round starting round starting
October and beyond October and beyond

3.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 0.11

 5- Outstanding: • List of teaching and non- 4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5
teaching personnel provided technical
assistance within the RPMS cycle. 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding:
• Accomplished Performance and Coaching Whole year round Whole year round 0.135
Form (reference New RPMS-PPST Manual) starting June starting June
• Consolidated Developmental Needs of
Teachers (Development Plan)
4- Very Satisfactory: All indicators are met 4 - Very Satisfactory: 4 - Very Satisfactory:
3.3 Strengthen school June but with 1 item lacking Whole year round Whole year round
performance for support 2018- starting July starting July
3 3- Satisfactory: All indicators are met but 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
services within the RPMS April
cycle 2019 with 2 items lacking Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting July
2- Unsatisfactory: All indicators are met but 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
with 3 items lacking Whole year round Whole year round
starting September starting September
1- Poor: Only 2 indicators are present 1- Poor: Whole year 1- Poor: Whole year
round starting round starting
October and beyond October and beyond

4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.14

5- Outstanding:• Approved school 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4 5 4.5 4.5
Mobilization Plan Whole year round Whole year round
Parents’ • Report of school-community partnership starting June starting June
Involvement and • Minutes of Meetings
0.225
Community • Attendance Sheet
Partnership(10%) • Certificate of Appearance/ participation to
Municipal and other public and private
organizations’ meetings
4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 of 5 are complied 4 - Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
4.1 Improved
June Whole year round Whole year round
establishment of school,
2018- starting July starting July
family and community 5
April
partnership for
2019 3- Very Satisfactory: Only 3 of 5 are complied 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
performance
Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting August
2- Satisfactory: Only 2 of 5 are complied 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
Whole year round Whole year round
starting September starting September
1- Poor: Only 1 is complied 1- Poor: Whole year 1- Poor: Whole year
round starting round starting
October and beyond October and beyond

4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.23

 5- Outstanding: • Minutes of PTA Meetings 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4 5 4.5 4.5
conducted Whole year round Whole year round
• Attendance Sheet starting June starting June
• Minutes of community stakeholders’
participation
• List of community stakeholder’s 0.225
participation in Brigada Eskwela, PTA Day,
Scouting and other school-community
related activities
• Report on Donations (Physical and Financial
4.2 Strengthen Parents June
Teacher Association, 2018- 4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4of the indicators 4 - Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
5
alumni and other April were met Whole year round Whole year round
organizations 2019 starting July starting July
3- Satisfactory: Only 3 of the indicators were 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
Whole year round Whole year round
starting July starting August
2- Unsatisfactory: Only 2 of the indicators 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
met Whole year round Whole year round
starting September starting September
1- Poor: No evidence at all 1- Poor: Whole year 1- Poor: Whole year
round starting round starting
October and beyond October and beyond

4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.23

5- Outstanding: • Enhanced SIP 5 - Outstanding: 5 - Outstanding: 4 5 4.5 4.5
• Copy of Approved AIP Submitted the SIP 5 Submitted the SIP 5
• Copy of Approved WFP days before the days before the 0.225
• List of School Planning Team deadline deadline
School • Copy of SRC
Leadership, • Level of SBM Practice 4- Very Satisfactory- 4- Very Satisfactory-
Management and 4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 of the items are Submitted the SIP 3 Submitted the SIP 3
Operations(10%) complied days before the days before the
June deadline deadline
5.1 Performed Data- 2018- 3- Satisfactory: Only 3 of the items are 3- Satisfactory- 3- Satisfactory-
5
Based Strategic Planning April complied Submitted the SIP Submitted the SIP
2019 on the deadline on the deadline

2- Unsatisfactory- 2- Unsatisfactory-
2- Satisfactory: Only 2 of the items are
Submitted the SIP 3 Submitted the SIP 3
complied
days after the days after the
deadline deadline
1- Poor: Only 1 of the items are complied 1- Poor: - Submitted 1- Poor: - Submitted
the report 5 days the report 5 days
after the deadline after the deadline
4 5 4.5 4.5 0.23
 5- Outstanding: • Liquidation Report 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4 5 4.5 4.5
5. 2 Performed clear • Bids and Awards Committee (if applicable) 100% of the Submitted 5 days
financial management • Functional Transparency Board programs and before the deadline 0.135
system for the school • Report on SEF, PTA, School Canteen and projects were
supported by evidences other fund sources and status of utilization implemented
such as reports,account 4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
4- Very Satisfactory: Only 4 out of 6 indicators 90% of the programs Submitted 4 days
logs, database system were complied and projects were before the deadline
June implemented
3- Satisfactory: Only 3 out of 6 indicators 3- Satisfactory: 80% 3- Satisfactory:
2018- of the programs and
3 were complied Submitted3 days
April projects were before the deadline
2019 implemented
2- Unsatisfactory: Only 2 out of 6 indicators 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
were complied 70% of the programs Submitted On the
and projects were deadline
implemented
1- Poor: Only 1 out of 6 indicators complied 1- Poor: 50% of the 1- Poor: Submitted
programs and 5 days after the
projects were deadline
implemented
4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.14
;5 - Outstanding: • Status Report of fund 5- Outstanding: 5- Outstanding: 4 5 4.5 4.5
utilization vis-à-vis Work and Financial Plan Updated data 5 days Updated data 5 0.09
• Program of Work (For repair) before the deadline days before the
• Pictures of facilities/supplies procured deadline
4- Very Satisfactory: 4- Very Satisfactory:
4- Very Satisfactory: 3of the 4 indicators were
updated 3 days updated 3 days
5.3. Allocated prioritized updated
June before the deadline before the deadline
School funds for programs and
2018- 3- Satisfactory: only 2 of the 4 indicators were 3- Satisfactory: 3- Satisfactory:
Leadership, school facilities, 2 updated within the updated within the
April updated
Management and improvement and deadline deadline
2019
Operations maintenance
2- Satisfactory: only 1 of the indicators were 2- Unsatisfactory: 2- Unsatisfactory:
updated Updated 3 days after Updated 3 days
the deadline after the deadline
1- Poor: No status report 1- Poor: Updated 5 1- Poor: Updated 5
days after the days after the
deadline deadline
4.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 0.09
Overall rating for
Accomplishments: 4.12

Ratee: Rater: Approving Officer:

JOCELYN P. BALASUELA JUDITH V. ROMAGUERA MA. LIZA R. TABILON, Ed.D., CESO VI

HT-I/ School Head OIC- ASDS OIC Schools Division Superintendent

Adjectival Rating Scale

Outstanding = 4.500 – 5.000
Very Satisfactory = 3.500 – 4.499
Satisfactory = 2.500 - 3.499
Unsatisfactory = 1.500 - 2.499
Poor = 1.000 - 1.499