Apalan ES ESIP

APALAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
119805
APALAN, TUBURAN, CEBU
ENHANCED
SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
School Year 2019-2022
School Improvement Plan

i
MESSAGE
The great thing in this world is not so much where we are, but in what direction we
are moving on (OW Holmes). Yes, indeed, Apalan Elementary School is geared towards moving on
to a higher level of quality, equitable, culture-based and complete basic education through the actual
implementation of the School Improvement Plan.
Furthermore, Apalan Elementary School like some other schools has been trying to provide
the best of the 21st century education to its learners. We see the Enhanced School Improvement
Plan (ESIP) as our opportunity and of high significance to effectively address the needs or demands
of our learners, our teachers, our school, the community, and the department.
We believe that through SIP, it will enable us translate the Department of Education and
Apalan Elementary School’s vision, mission, goals and objectives into tangible results because (1)
we can lessen the learners’ challenges in learning for example the need to have a decent
classroom, (2) we can increase teacher’s productivity by the decrease on learners’ challenges in
school which means we can actively participate in all or most of the seminars or programs
conducted by the DepEd, LGU, and private organizations, (3) we can strengthen community
relationships for example with the parents of our learners, the barangay officials, and the like. All
these contribute to a productive school which can be considered as learner-centered, teacher-
centered, involved with the community, and compliant with the DepEd 21st century education
standards.
With the collaborative effort of the School Planning Team, guided by steps in Deped Order
N.44, s. 2015, problems were determined one by one leading to distinguish the Gap, PIA, Root
Cause, and providing varied solutions to address its needs, yet the realization of the said PIA’s and
the success of this enhanced SIP would significantly depend on the continuous support of external
stakeholders, thus, the school faculty is unceasingly inviting and appealing to the mentioned
stakeholders for the accomplishment of this undertaking.
With all these things, my heartfelt gratitude to the School Planning Team (SPT), Project
Team (PT), parents, teachers, pupils, and the community for the collaborative effort in the creation
of this School Improvement Plan which will guide us towards the realization of our goals. It is our
fervent hope to continually improve the academic programs, and create a much safer place for our
schoolchildren and an inspiring area for learning that will prepare them in real life’s voyage.
RUTH BRACERO TAMAYO

School Principal

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ACRONYMS iv
LIST OF TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS v
CHAPTER 1: DepEd Vision-Mission and Core Values
A. Clarity and Completeness of the Discussion on DepEd VMV 6

B. List of Roles and Responsibilities of All SPT Members 7-9
C. SPT Timetable 9
CHAPTER 2: ASSESS
A. School’s Current Situation 10

B. Priority Improvement Areas 11
C. General Objectives 11
D. Targets 12-
13
E. Root Cause Analysis 13-
17
CHAPTER 3: PLAN
A. List of Solutions 18-

20
B. Project Work Plan and Budget Matrix (Annex) 20-
25
C. Annual Implementation Plan Year 1 (Annex) 25-
30
CHAPTER 4: ACT
A. Project Monitoring Report Forms 31-

32
B. Annual Work Financial Plan Year 1 (Annex) 33-
35

iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
DepEd - Department of Education

SIP - School Improvement Program
AIP - Annual Implementation Plan
SCDT - School Community Data Template
IO - Intermediate Outcomes
DEDP - Division Education Development Plan
INSET - In service Training for Teachers
RAFI - Ramon Aboitiz Foundation Incorporated
LGU - Local Government Unit
NGO - Non Government Organization
DCP - DepEd Computerization Program
DICP - DepEd Internet Connectivity Program
SW - Severely Wasted
W - Wasted
PTA - Parent Teachers Organization
NAT - National Achievement Test
MPS - Mean Percentage Score
PARDO - Pupils At Risk Of Dropping Out
SARDO - Students At Risk Of Dropping Out
DEAR - Drop Everything And Read
RELISH - Read a Line and Share
ORV - Oral Reading Verification
MOOE - Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses
eSIP - Enhanced School Improvement Plan
SPT - School-Community Planning Team
CI - Continuous Improvement
PIA - Priority Improvement Areas
PT - Project Team
PHIL-IRI - Philippine Informal Reading Inventory
RHU - Rural Health Unit
BHW - Barangay Health Workers
LAC - Learning Action Cells
EGRA - Early Grade Reading Assessment
EGMAT - Early Grades Mathematics Assessment
MOOE - Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses

iv
LIST OF TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Table 1. List of SPT Members, their Roles and Functions 7-9

Table 2. SPT Timetable of Activities 9
Table 3. List of School Priority Improvement Areas (PIA’s) 11
Table 4. List of General Objectives 11
Table 5. List of Targets 12
Table 6. List of Projects and Solutions 19-20
Table 7. Annual Implementation Plan 24-27
Table 8. Monitoring Plan 28
Table 9. Project Monitoring Plan 29
Table 10. Annual Work Financial Plan 30-31
Illustration 1. Low MPS in National Achievement Test (Fish Bone) 13

Illustration 2. Low MPS in National Achievement Test (Why-why Diagram) 13
Illustration 3. Low MPS in National Achievement Test (Problem Tree) 14
Illustration 4. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners (Fish Bone) 15
Illustration 5. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners (Why-why Diagram) 15
Illustration 6. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners (Problem Tree) 16
Illustration 7. Low Numeracy Rate of Grades 1-3 Learners (Fish Bone) 17
Illustration 8. Low Numeracy Rate of Grades 1-3 Learners (Why-why Diagram) 17
Illustration 9. Low Numeracy Rate of Grades 1-3 Learners (Problem Tree) 18

v
CHAPTER 1
Department of Education Mission, Vision, and Core Values Statement
C
Driven with the same aspirations, Apalan Elementary School once again crafted a new ESIP H
cycle for the next 3 years. To begin, a focused group discussion was conducted composed of the
different SPT members, an orientation was done and each representative was given the opportunity A
to share ideas for the development of the school. With the data gathered beforehand, pressing P
problems were identified, categorized according to priorities, objectives were set, root causes were
identified in order to formulate possible solutions leading to the formulation of the project.
T
E
With a clear understanding of the Mission, Vision and Goals of the Department of R
Education, the SPT members acknowledge their full responsibility towards its achievement. The
team came up with a unified goal which is learner –centered, values – oriented, and gender
sensitive. 1
As recognized by the team, the school has the mission to provide an accessible and non-
discriminatory instruction may it be in gender, race, or socioeconomic status and to observe the
right of every child, teacher, and among others involved in the teaching-learning process. The
students will express and engage themselves in the programs or activities of the school wherein
they feel the support from their teachers, the school administrator and staff, their parents, the
community, and the stakeholders. The teachers will scaffold the learning of their students and
support them with warmth and openness, and ensure that each learner is nurtured in every
classroom. The school administrators and staff will support the learners and observe sensitivity to
the needs of both the learners and the teachers and other concerns need to be addressed. The
family, community, and the stakeholders will take part in the programs or activities with willingness
and show their support to the learners, teachers, and the school to a certain degree that is ideal and
appropriate.
Further, in observance of the Department’s Core Values, Apalan Elementary School observes
being “Maka-Diyos” in allowing its learners to exercise their faith with freedom and sincerity. Being
“Maka-tao” in the promotion and possession of respect to different people of different backgrounds
(socioeconomic status, religion, ethnicity, etc.). Being “Makakalikasan” in the participation to
environmental programs or activities crafted by the DepEd, LGU, or private organizations. Being
“Makabansa” in the practice of being “Makadiyos”, “Makatao”, and being “Makakalikasan”. All these
values equip the school and the community in the fulfillment of the DepEd’s Vision and Mission by
the transformation of the learners reinforced and practiced by their teachers.
The School – Community Planning Team is cognizant of the many challenges it entails towards
its realization, but with the full support, cooperation and right attitude towards their roles and
responsibilities, success is at hand. The team will work hand in hand to execute the solutions
formulated and implement projects that will resolve each PIA so as to completely realize the
school’s dreams and aspirations. The team will ensure full commitment and collaboration with
regards to the planning, implementing and monitoring of the projects formulated because the team
believes that ”Cooperation is the thorough conviction that nobody can get there unless everybody
gets there, no one should be left behind”, (Virginia Burden).

6
Table 1. LIST OF SPT MEMBERS AND THEIR ROLES AND FUNCTIONS
NAME ROLE FUNCTIONS

 Convenes the School Planning
Team every beginning of the SIP
cycle and all other activities of the
SPT.
 Provides leadership and guidance in
the development of the plan, clearly
explain the SIP planning process to
the planning team and helps them
understand their role in the process.
RUTH B. TAMAYO LEADER  Leads the overall planning,
implementating, monitoring and
evaluating activities of the school.
 Facilitates workshop e.g. Project
Work Plan and Budget Matrix, AIP
and others.
 Perform such other roles and
functions deemed necessary,
incidental to the effective functioning
of the mandate under RA No. 9155
as delegated by the SPT.
 Represents and articulates the voice
and concerns of the teachers in the
planning of the SIP.
 Provides the needed information
and guidance relative to teaching
and learning activities and
processes undertaken by the
TEACHER teachers everyday.
ROSANNA B. ESTRERA REPRESENTATIVE  Actively participate during the
development of the SIP in
establishing priorities, setting of
goals and formulating
implementation strategies for the
plan.
 Actively advocates for the succesful
implementation of the different
interventions identified and
prioritized in the SIP.
 Perform such other duties which is
necessary, incidental and delegated
to her by the SPT.
 Represents the voice and articulates
the concerns of the parents in the
preparation of the SIP.

7
 Share insights about what their
children need to learn and the
difficulties they face in the school,
their aspirations for the school and
their children and present other
areas of concern.
 Participate actively in setting up the
JUNMAR C. QUIŇO PTA Representative goals, strategies and priorities of
school.
 Actively supports all the
interventions layed down in the SIP
and persistently advocate to his/her
sector to achieve maximum
participation in the achievement of
the school goals and priorities.
to him by the SPT.
and concerns of the community and
the local government unit relative to
education.
 Share valuable information and
guidance on relevant issues and
concerns of the community that
might have significance in the
formulation of the school
PULGENIO PONO LGU Representative improvement plan.
 Participate actively in the formulation
of school interventions, startegies
and priorities to address the
pressing needs and issues of the
school.
and persistently advocate to his
to him by the SPT.
and concerns of the community and
the local government unit relative to
education.
 Share valuable information and
MICHELLE P.QUIŇO SPG President
guidance on relevant issues and
concerns of the community that

8
might have significance in the
formulation of the school
improvement plan.
 Participate actively in the formulation
of school interventions, startegies
and priorities to address the
pressing needs and issues of the
school.
and persistently advocate to her
to her by the SPT.
Table 2. SPT Timetable of Activities
ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE
Preparatory Activities
Secure/ gather the data needed. July 7, 2019
Organize data using the SCDT. July 14, 2019
Organize the School-Community Planning Team July 21, 2019

(SPT).
Convene the SPT for orientation vision and July 28, 2019
mission sharing and scheduling.
Phase I: ASSESS
Conduct Focus Group Discussion (FGD) August 4, 2019
Interpret the data gathered August 5 – 7, 2019
Discuss the Root Cause August 18 – September 25, 2019

9
Phase 2: PLAN
C
H
Review general objectives and targets October 2, 2019 A
Formulate solutions October 3-5, 2019 P
T
Develop Project Design October 8-10, 2019
E
Write the SIP October 15 -19, 2019 R
Prepare the AIP October 22 – 26, 2019
2
Phase 3: ACT
Test the solutions October –December 2019

Roll out the Solutions
December 2019
Check the Progress of AIP December 2019 and onwards
Communicating to Stakeholders/ SRC Reporting December 2019 and onwards
Project Implementation January to December 2020
Project Monitoring and Evaluation January to December 2020
CHAPTER 2
Assess
2. A. School’s Current Situation
Apalan Elementary School is located along the highway and a few meters away from the
coastline. It was founded in the year 1938 with a land area of 8,775.36 square meters with a Deed
of Donation and Tax Declaration.
The Learner-Classroom ratio is 45:1, there are four functioning toilets, with a ratio of 80:1
for male while 77:1 for female, as reflected, the school needs to construct additional comfort rooms
for proper sanitation. Further, the school has an unfinished perimeter fence prompting stray animals
to enter and guzzle in the plants. Additionally, school stage is dilapidated and needs major repair.
The school environment also has to improve its physical appearance through school beautification
like landscaping and construction of plant boxes so as to make it attractive and appealing, in a way
that will encourage the learners to come to school regularly.
Recently, there are eight nationally-funded teachers with a Teacher-Learner ratio of 40:1
and a school principal managing the school. Each is given the opportunity to grow professionally

10
and enhance their teaching potentials through enrolling in Masters’ Degree, attending trainings like
In-service Training for Teachers (INSET) which is given twice in a school year, K-12 basic training
courses, computer literacy, seminars and workshops which help them upsurge their teaching
capabilities.
The nutritional status of pupils plays a vital role in their learning abilities. Proper health and
nutrition comes along with pupil’s performance. At the moment the school met the Division Target of
zero malnourished pupils. The school has a functioning hand washing facilities available for
learners’ use.
For the past 3 years, the school had significantly increased its enrolment greater than 5%
which is a manifestation of good relation of the school to the community and due to the community’s
increasing population. On the contrary, as reflected in the school report card, prevalence of dropout
and repetition rate had been greater than 2% for the past three years. Learners’ at Risk of Dropping
Out (LARDOs’) where then identified.
As to academics, the team found out that English literacy rate based on Phil-IRI GST result
for frustration readers were 11% or 12 out of 109 learners. Moreover, based on EGMA result, for
Grades 1-3 learners, 134 out of 134 were non-numerates. A huge and pressing problem the school
is facing at the moment. Meanwhile, as seen on Table 4, NAT result in five subjects were very
behind as to the Division Target is concerned, such occurrences require immediate attention that
will respond into its immediate need.
With the identified gaps, the SPT hopes to address the challenges one by one through
careful planning, digging out its root causes, and brainstorming of possible solutions leading to the
implementation of the project.
2. B. Priority Improvement Areas

Table 3. List of School Priority Improvement Areas (PIA’s)
IMPORTANCE
MAGNITUDE
FEASIBILITY
STRATEGIC
URGENCY
AVERAGE
INTERMEDIATE IMPROVEMENT
OUTCOMES AREAS INTERPRETATION
 Low NAT MPS Very High

5 5 5 5 5 Priority
IO5: Learners  Low English
attain learning Literacy Rate in 5 5 5 5 5 Very High
standards Grades 4- 6 Priority
learners.
 Low Numeracy
Rate in Grades 5 5 5 5 5 Very High
1 – 3 learners. Priority
In consideration with the data being gathered, the SPT found out the different improvement
areas and carefully list and categorize them accordingly. With careful deliberation, 3 improvement
areas were interpreted as “Very High Priority” prompting the team to plan out different projects that
will address its immediate needs.

11
2. C. General Objectives
Table 4. List of General Objectives
Time Frame
Priority Improvement
Areas General Objectives
2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
ACCESS AND QUALITY
Low NAT MPS To increase the NAT MPS from 75% 75% 75%
35.54% to 75% in 3 years.
Low English Literacy

Rate of Grades 4 – 6 To decrease the number of 0% 0% 0%
Learners frustration readers from 12 out of
109 pupils or 11% to 100% within 3
years.
To decrease the number of non- 0% 0% 0%

numerates from 134 out of 134
Low Numeracy Rate of pupils or 100% to 0% within 3 years.
Grades 1 -3 Learners
As reflected in Table 4, NAT MPS in five subjects should increase by 75% for year one and
so in the following years. With regards to literacy rate in English for grades 1-4 as well as the
numeracy rate in grades 1-3 the school together with the SPT and PT should immediately plan out
actions that will decrease the number of frustration readers and non-numerates in order to produce
quality learners.
2. D. Planning Worksheet
Planning is a crucial and fundamental tool in achieving the organization’s goal and
objectives. It navigates us to the right track and serves as roadmap which keeps us on course.
Careful and right planning prevents unnecessary detouring which leads us to wasteful spending of
time and resources.
Table 5. List of Targets

Time Frame
Priority General
Improvement Objectives Root Cause/s S.Y. S.Y. S.Y.
2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022
Area
Low NAT To increase 75% 75% 75%

MPS the NAT *Failed to establish a system on effective

12
MPS supervision and monitoring of teaching-
35.54% to learning process.
75% in 3
years. *Insufficient provision of resources.
*Failed to create a system for quality

assurance of effective teacher-made
diagnostic, formative and summative
assessment.
*Ineffective teaching pedagogies and

strategies.
Low English *Lack of programs that provide 0% 0% 0%

Literacy Rate To opportunities for teachers to acquire
of Grades 4 – decrease competencies on preparing inferential
6 Learners the number and critical levels of comprehension
of questions
frustration
readers *Inappropriate strategies in developing
from 12 out English literacy.
of 109
pupils or *Failed to monitor the quality and
11% to 0% accuracy of the process during the
within 3 conduct of PHIL-IRI.
years.
*Lacks of programs that provide 60% 20% 0%

Low To opportunities for teachers to acquire
Numeracy decrease competencies on preparing inferential
Rate of the number and critical levels of comprehension
Grades 1 -3 of non- questions.
Learners numerates
from 134
out of 134 *Ineffective teaching pedagogies and
pupils or strategies.
100% to
0% within 3
years. *Inconsistent monitoring and provision of
resources.
Table 5 displays the different root causes that will bridge into finding the right solution of the
different priority improvement areas. Digging out the root causes is a must to determine the reasons
behind, thus formulating the exact projects to be employed. The SPT together with the PT will
implement the projects seriously to support the Division’s overall performance.
2. E. Root Cause Analysis

13
Illustration 1: Low MPS in National Achievement Test
Materials & Equipment People

Failure to supervise Inappropriate
Unavailable . Defective and monitor Teachers teaching strategies
Books. .
School Head
. .ICT Equipment
Low academic
Insufficient Obsolete performance
Learners To increase the
NAT MPS in
English from
Feedbacks and Unsuitable Lack facilities 35.54% to 75% in
TA were not strategies 3 years.
given Inability to address School
Assessment different learning
styles
Teaching Many home chores and
lack of follow up
Lack of programs in the 5 Influence of gadget
core subjects that will
Home
increase NAT MPS i
Process /Procedure & Programs
Environment
The illustration displays that there are varied hindering factors affecting Low NAT MPS,
these involves materials and equipment, people, process and procedure and the environment as
well. With the identified root causes, the School Project Team will formulate accurate and immediate
solutions to resolve the problem.
Because of non-mastery Because of inadequate

of the skills lesson preparation
Why was Lack of opportunities to

Why non- Why teaching- Why lesson mentor and coach
NAT MPS
mastery of skills learning process is preparation is teachers in planning
in Grade 6 not engaging? inadequate?
arise? effective lesson plan
low?
Because teaching-learning Because of the lack of opportunities to

process is not engaging mentor and coach teachers in planning
effective lesson plan
Illustration 2 indicates the need to create a system on effective supervision and monitoring
on teaching-learning process so as to give solution on Low NAT MPS.

14
To increase the NAT MPS in
English from 35.54% to 75% in
3 years.
Non-mastery of skills Competencies are not Teaching-learning

taught. fully covered. process is not engaging.
Collaborative output Lack effective class

Lesson preparation is
making is not practiced. supervision and
inadequate
monitoring
Intensify coaching and mentoring for teachers to

improve teaching-learning process
Illustration 3 presents that establishing a system on effective supervision and monitoring on

teaching-learning process is a must to intensify solutions in addressing Low NAT MPS. School Head
plays a vital role in giving technical assistance to teachers to improve the delivery of teaching.
Illustration 4: Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners.

Failure to supervise Inappropriate teaching
Unavailable . Defective and monitor strategies
Teachers
Remedial class time is not
Books. . utilized
School Head
. .ICT Equipment
Low academic
Insufficient Obsolete performance School Improvement Plan
Learners 15
Feedbacks and Less exposure to English language in

given learning hubs
Assessment Inability to address
different learning School
styles
Many home chores
Teaching and lack of follow-up
Influence of gadget
Home
Process /Procedure & Program

Environment
To decrease the
number of frustration
readers from 12 out
of 109 pupils or 11%
to 100% within 3
years.
Lack of program that will

upsurge English Literacy
Skill
Illustration 4 shows the different CIGP’s that result to the low English literacy rate of the
Grades 4-6 learners. Varied hindering factors were identified and were categorized as such:
materials and equipment, people, process/procedure & program, and environment, all these
contributed to decreasing English literacy skills of the pupils.
Illustration 5. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners.
Because the teachers failed to provide

Because the pupils appropriate activities in developing
failed to pass the GST. pupils higher order thinking skills.
Why do Why do pupils were not

Why do English Teachers failed to provide
pupils failed able to answer higher order
literacy rate in appropriate activities in developing
to pass the thinking skills type of
Grades 4-6 low? pupils higher order thinking skills.
GST? question?
Because pupils were not able to

answer higher order thinking skills
type of question.
As reflected on illustration 5, the school should provide programs enabling the teachers to
enhance their skills in teaching English literacy among pupils. Low comprehension of the learners
during Group Screening Test in PHIL-IRI resulted to the inability of pupils to answer questions given
may it be in LOTS and much more in HOTS.
Illustration 6. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners.

16
To decrease the number of frustration readers from
12 out of 109 pupils or 11% to 100% within 3 years.
Pupils were not able to

Pupils failed to pass answer higher order
The teacher failed to provide
in GST. thinking skills.
appropriate teaching strategies.
Low comprehension Teaching -learning

Lack of supervision by
level process is not
the school heads
engaging.
Provide LAC Session to teachers for effective

teaching-learning process.
Depicted in illustration 6 is the failure of the school to monitor the quality and accuracy of
the process during the conduct of GST in PHIL-IRI that led to the low literacy rate in English of
Grades 4-6 learners. Other causes were inappropriate teaching strategies, lack of school head
supervision and the incapacity of the pupils to answer HOTS questions.
Illustration 7: Low Numeracy Rate in Grades 1-3 Learners

Failure to supervise Inappropriate teaching
Unavailable . Defective and monitor strategies
Teachers Remedial class time is not
Books. . utilized
School Head
. .ICT Equipment
Low academic School Improvement Plan
Insufficient performance 17
Obsolete
Learners
not given Lack of facilities
strategies
Inability to address
Assessment different learning
School
styles
Many home chores
Teaching and lack of follow-up
Home
Process /Procedure & Program

Environment
To decrease the
number of non-
numerates from 134
out of 134 pupils or
100% to 0% within 3
years.
Lack of program that will

upsurge Numeracy Skills
Influence of gadgets
Illustration 7 reflects the varied reasons that causes low numeracy skills among the pupils
during the conduct of EGMA. Rigid monitoring, intervention and implementation of projects are very
essential in order to decrease the number of non-numerates in Grades 1-3.
Because pupils were not Because the teachers failed

proficient in the four fundamental to use differentiated activities
operations in Math in teaching
The teachers lack

Why do Why do pupils were Why do teachers were not Why do teachers failed appropriate
numeracy not proficient in the able to develop the four to use differentiated knowledge on
rate in four fundamental fundamental operations activities in teaching? effective methods
Grades 1-3 operations in Math? appropriately? and strategies in
low? teaching Math.
Because the teachers were not Because the teachers lack

able to develop the four appropriate knowledge on
fundamental operations to the effective methods and
learners appropriately. strategies in teaching Math
Illustration 8 reveals the root cause of the low numeracy rate of Grades 1-3, wherein the
teachers lack of appropriate knowledge on effective methods and strategies in teaching Math should
be addressed in order to solve the pressing problem which causes low numeracy rate in Math.

18
pupils or 100% to 0% within 3 years.
Pupils were not proficient Teachers were not able to Teachers failed to use
in the 4 fundamental develop the 4 fundamental differentiated activities.
operations operations to the learners C
H
A
Teaching -learning Lack of supervision
P
Low mathematical process is not
skills by the school head T
engaging.
E
R
3
Teaching pedagogies and strategies of
teachers were not effective.
Illustration 9 clearly shows that a lot of impeding factors were identified causing low
numeracy rate in Grades 1-3 learners. Teachers should improve their teaching strategies
and assess its effectiveness. Further, differentiated activities should be applied since learners vary
in their learning styles. School heads on the other hand must have proper supervision in order to
give technical assistance when necessary.
CHAPTER 3
PLAN
A. Solutions
Table 6. List of Projects and Solutions

19
PIA Root Causes Solutions
(Project Name) Major Activities

20
Low NAT MPS *Failed to establish a system LET’S GET HIGH IN Conduct regular LAC
on effective supervision and NAT Session
monitoring of teaching-
learning process.
Intensify Remedial
*Insufficient provision of Teaching
resources.
*Failed to create a system for Engage pupils in peer

quality assurance of effective tutoring
teacher-made diagnostic,
formative and summative
assessment.
*Ineffective teaching
pedagogies and strategies.
Low English LEARN TO READ

Literacy Rate of *Failed to establish a system READ TO LEARN
Grades 4-6 on effective supervision and Conduct regular LAC
Learners. monitoring of teaching- Session
learning process.
*Insufficient provision of
resources. Intensify Remedial
Teaching
*Failed to create a system for
quality assurance of effective
teacher-made diagnostic, Implement English
formative and summative Banner Program
assessment.
Engage pupils in peer
*Ineffective teaching tutoring
*The school lacks programs Provide appropriate

that provide opportunities for instructional materials
teachers to gain more
knowledge in teaching
Use differentiated
English literacy.
activities
*The teacher used
inappropriate strategies in
Close supervision
developing English literacy.
among teachers
*The school fails to monitor
the quality and accuracy of
Consistent mentoring
the process during the
and coaching of
conduct of PHIL-IRI.
teachers.

21
Low Numeracy *Failed to establish a system FUN IN MATH Conduct regular LAC
Rate of Grades on effective supervision and Session
1-3 Learners monitoring of teaching-
learning process.
*Insufficient provision of
resources. Intensify Remedial
Teaching
*Failed to create a system for
quality assurance of effective
teacher-made diagnostic,
formative and summative
assessment. Engage pupils in peer
tutoring
Provide appropriate
*Lack of programs that
instructional
provide opportunities for
materials.
teachers to acquire
competencies on preparing
inferential and critical levels
of comprehension questions.
*Inconsistent monitoring and

provision of resources.
Use differentiated
activities
Close supervision
among teachers
Consistent mentoring
and coaching of
teachers.
Table 6 indicates the different project title for each priority improvement area and its varied
solutions. With a unified goal, the team and the school will work together to achieve the desired
outcome. In 3 years’ time, it is the school’s ardent hope to produce 21 st century quality learners.

22
B. PROJECT WORK PLAN AND BUDGET MATRIX
With the identified PIA’s, projects were crafted by the School Project Team assigned in their
respective areas of implementation. Project Work Plan and Budget Matrix were prepared in order to
have an orderly operation of the projects as seen below:
1. Project Title: LET’S GET HIGH IN NAT
Problem Statements:
*School NAT MPS is 35.54% only which is below the 75% Division Target.
Project Objective Statements:
* To increase the NAT MPS from 35.54% to 75% in 3 years.
Root Cause: Intensify coaching and mentoring of teachers to improve teaching-learning process.
PROJECT WORK PLAN AND BUDGET MATRIX
BUDGET(
DATE OF
PERSON per annum BUDGET
ACTIVITY OUTPUT IMPLEMENTA-
RESPONSIBLE for yearly SOURCE
TION
activities)
Gather and analyze Teachers
*NAT Result January 2020 1000 MOOE
the NAT Result School Head
(Form 15)
Profile the teachers *Quadrant of Teachers
and pupils by Teachers January 2020 School Head 2000 MOOE
quadrant. *Profile of Pupils Pupils
Prepare LAC Plan *Approved LAC Plan January 2020 1000 MOOE
School Head
Plan out *Minutes of the
interventions through Meetings Teachers
January 2020 1000 MOOE
meeting with the *Accomplishment School Head
teachers. Reports
*Mastered 10 words
per week January - Teachers
1000 MOOE
Conduct LAC December 2020 School Head
Session
Intensify Remedial *Developed at least 2

January - Teachers
Teaching reading skills in a 5000 MOOE
December 2020 School Head
week
Conduct peer
January - Teachers
tutoring *Read at least 2 1500 MOOE
December 2020 Pupils
stories in a week.
January - Teachers 3000 MOOE
Provide appropriate *Developed at least 2 December 2020 School Head
instructional reading instructional
materials materials in a week.

23
*Accomplished Teachers
January -
Close supervision Mentoring and School Head 1500 MOOE
December 2020
among teachers. Coaching Form SPT
*Accomplished
Teachers
Monitoring and Feedbacking Form
July 2020 School Head 500 MOOE
Evaluation and Project Monitoring
SPT
Form.
2. Project Title: LEARN TO READ, READ TO LEARN
Problem Statements:
*12 out of 109 pupils or 11% of grades 4-6 learners belong to frustration readers during the
conduct of PHIL-IRI (Pre-Test)
* To decrease the number of frustration readers from 12 out of 109 pupils or 11% to 0%
In 3 years.
Root Cause: The school lacks programs that provide opportunities for teachers to gain more
knowledge in teaching English literacy.

BUDGET(per
DATE OF
PERSON annum for BUDGET
RESPONSIBLE yearly SOURCE
TION
activities)
Gather and *PHIL-IRI
analyze the PHIL- Consolidation Teachers
IRI and NAT *NAT Result School Head
Result (Form 15)
Profile the *Teachers’ Teachers
teachers and Quadrant January 2020 School Head 2000 MOOE
pupils by quadrant *Profile of Pupils Pupils
*Approved LAC
Prepare LAC Plan January 2020 1000 MOOE
Plan School Head
interventions Meetings Teachers
through meeting *Accomplishment School Head
with the teachers. Reports
Conduct regular *Mastered at least
February - Teachers
drill before English 10 vocabulary 1500 MOOE
Class words per week
Intensify remedial *Developed at
February - Teachers
reading program least 2 reading 1500 MOOE
skills in a week
*Read at least 2 February - Teachers
Peer Tutoring 1000 MOOE
stories in a week. December 2020 Pupils
*Developed at
least 2 reading
Implement English February- Teachers
instructional 3000 MOOE
Banner Programs December 2020 School Head
materials in a
week.
Monitoring and *Accomplished July 2020 Teachers 1500 MOOE

24
Feedbacking
Evaluation Form and Project School Head
Monitoring Form.
3. Project Title: FUN IN MATH

Problem Statements:
* 134 out of 134 pupils of grades 1-3 were non-numerates during the EGMA
administration.
*MPS in Math during NAT is 35.40% only.
*To decrease the number of non-numerates from 134 out of 134 pupils or 100% to 0% in 3
years.
Root Cause: Teaching pedagogies and strategies of teachers were not effective.
BUDGET(per
DATE OF
PERSON annum for BUDGET
RESPONSIBLE yearly SOURCE
TION
activities)
Gather and
*EGMA
analyze the Teachers
Consolidation January 2020 1000 MOOE
EGMA and NAT School Head
*NAT Result
Result
(Form 15)
Profile the
*Quadrant of Teachers
teachers and
Teachers January 2020 School Head 2000 MOOE
pupils by
*Profile of Pupils Pupils
quadrant.
*Approved LAC
Prepare LAC Plan January 2020 1000 MOOE
Plan School Head
interventions Meetings Teachers
through meeting *Accomplishment School Head
with the teachers. Reports
Conduct LAC January - Teachers

2000 MOOE
Session *Developed December 2020 School Head
strategies in
Intensify Remedial teaching
January - Teachers
Teaching 1500 MOOE
Conduct peer
January - Teachers
tutoring 1 000 MOOE
*75% numerates December 2020 Pupils
Provide learners in January - Teachers 5000 MOOE
appropriate Grades 1-3 December 2020 School Head
instructional during the Early

25
materials Grade
Mathematics
Close supervision Assessment Teachers
January -
among teachers. School Head 1000 MOOE
December 2020
SPT
*Accomplished
Teachers
Monitoring and Feedbacking
July 2020 School Head 1500 MOOE
Evaluation Form and Project
SPT
Monitoring Form.
C. Table 7. Annual Implementation Plan (AIP) - (Fiscal Year 2020)
SCHOOL BUDGET
PROJECT OUTPUT FOR THE PERSON(S) SCHEDULE BUDGET
IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES PER
OBJECTIVE YEAR RESPONSIBLE / VENUE SOURCES
PROJECT TITLE ACTIVITY
QUALITY
Gather and
LET’S GET To increase the *NAT Result
analyze NAT Teachers January
1000 MOOE
HIGH IN NAT NAT MPS Result School Head 2020
(Form 15)
35.54% to 75%
in 3 years. Profile the
*Quadrant of teachers and Teachers
January
Teachers pupils by School Head 2000 MOOE
2020
*Profile of Pupils quadrant. Pupils
Prepare LAC
*Approved LAC January
Plan 1000 MOOE
Plan School Head 2020
Plan out
*Minutes of interventions
Meetings through meeting Teachers January
1000 MOOE
*Accomplishment with the School Head 2020
Reports teachers.
*Developed at Intensify
January -
least 2 reading Remedial Teachers
December 5000 MOOE
skills in a week Teaching Pupils
2020
Conduct peer
January -
*Read at least 2 tutoring Teachers
December 1500 MOOE
stories in a week. School Head
2020
*Developed at Provide
least 2 reading appropriate Teachers January -
instructional instructional School Head December 3000 MOOE
materials in a materials SPT 2020
week.
*Accomplished Close
Teachers
Mentoring and supervision
School Head July 2020 500 MOOE
Coaching Form among teachers
SPT
*Accomplished Teachers January - 500 MOOE
Feedbacking Monitoring and School Head December
Form and Project Evaluation 2020

26
Monitoring Form.
*EGMA
Gather the
Consolidation Teachers January
EGMA and 100 MOOE
*NAT Result School Head 2020
NAT Result
(Form 15)
Profile the
January
Teachers pupils by School Head 200 MOOE
2020
Prepare LAC
Plan 100 MOOE
Plan out
*Minutes of the interventions
100 MOOE
Reports teachers.
LEARN TO To decrease the Gather and

*PHIL-IRI
READ, READ number of analyze the
TO LEARN frustration PHIL-IRI and 1000 MOOE
*NAT Result School Head 2020
readers from 12 NAT Result
(Form 15)
out of 109 or
Profile the
11% to 0% in 3
years. Teachers pupils by School Head
January
2000 MOOE
2020
Prepare LAC
Plan 1000 MOOE
Plan out
*Minutes of the interventions
1000 MOOE
Reports teachers.
Conduct regular January -

Teachers
*Mastered 10 drill before December 1500 MOOE
School Head
words per week English Class 2020
Intensify
Developed at remedial January -
Teachers
least 2 reading reading December 1500 MOOE
School Head
skills in a week program 2020
Read at least 2 January -

Teachers
stories in a week. Peer Tutoring December 1000 MOOE
Pupils
2020
Developed at Implement Teachers January - 3000 MOOE
least 2 reading English Banner School Head December
instructional Programs 2020
materials in a

27
week.
Accomplished
Feedbacking
Monitoring and Teachers
Form and Project July 2020 1500 MOOE
Evaluation School Head
Monitoring Form.
Gather and
*EGMA
To decrease the analyze the
FUN IN number of non- *NAT Result
EGMA and NAT
School Head 2020
1000 MOOE
MATH numerates from Result
(Form 15)
134 out of 134
pupils or 100% Profile the
*Quadrant of
teachers and Teachers
to 0% in 3 Teachers January
pupils by School Head 2000 MOOE
years. Profile of Pupils
quadrant. Pupils
2020
Prepare LAC
Plan 1000 MOOE
Plan out
interventions
*Minutes of
through meeting
Meetings Teachers January
with the 1000 MOOE
*Accomplishment School Head 2020
teachers.
Reports
Conduct LAC
Session
75% numerates
January
learners in
Teachers 2020-
Grades 1-3 2000 MOOE
School Head December
during the Early
2020
Grade
Mathematics
Assessment
Intensify
Remedial January
Teaching Teachers 2020-
1500 MOOE
School Head December
2020
Teachers January 1 000 MOOE

Conduct peer Pupils 2020-
tutoring December
2020

28
Provide
appropriate
January
instructional Teachers
2020 -
materials School Head 5000 MOOE
December
2020
Close
supervision January
Teachers
among 2020-
School Head 1000 MOOE
teachers. December
SPT
2022
Monitoring and
Evaluation
Teachers
July 2022 1500 MOOE
School Head
SPT
GOVERNANCE
Project CEM To enhance 100 % Initiate fund- SPT, PT,
(Construct school Accomplished raising Brgy. & PTA
Enhance environment by activities Officials, SH, Jan. 2020
Maintain) 100% through Teachers – 6,000 MOOE
and Pupils Dec. 2022
landscaping,
mural painting,
repair of school
office and
makeshift
classrooms, Tap possible SPT, PT,
develop the stakeholders Brgy. & PTA
area of school Jan. 2020
2,000
ground for Officials, SH, – MOOE
educational & Teachers Dec. 2022
recreation
activities, and
construct plant
boxes for Jan. 2020 1,000 MOOE
Gulayan sa –
Paaralan Coordinate with SPT, PT, Dec. 2022
Project in 3 the PTA and Brgy. & PTA
years. LGU Officials, SH,
& Teachers

29
SPT, PT,
C
Brgy. & PTA H
Proper Officials, SH,
prioritization of Teachers, &
Jan. 2020 A
– 379,950 MOOE
MOOE BAC
Dec. 2022
P
allocation Members
T
E
R
441,950
TOTAL 4
CHAPTER 4
Monitoring and Evaluation
Monitoring Plan
The Monitoring and Evaluation system provides the information needed to assess and
guide the project strategy, ensure effective operations, meet internal and external reporting
requirements, and inform future programming. It is an essential tool to support the continuous
learning process of the school during the ESIP implementation in order to meet the decision-making
requirements of the school head, teachers and even the learners.
Table 7. Monitoring Plan
Monitoring & Reporting & Feedback

Evaluation Objectives /Targets Schedule Mechanism to Stakeholders
Low NAT MPS To increase the NAT MPS June 2019 – *Remedial Session
35.54% to 75% in 3 years. April 2022 *Accomplishment Report
*Learner’s Output
Low English June 2019 – *Remedial Session

30
Literacy Rate To decrease the number of April 2022 *Accomplishment Report
of Grades 4 – frustration readers from 12 *Learner’s Output
6 Learners out of 109 pupils or 11% to *Literacy Rate Report
0% within 3 years.
June 2019 – *Remedial Session

Low To decrease the number of April 2022 *Accomplishment Report
Numeracy non-numerates from 134 out *Learner’s Output
Rate of of 134 pupils or 100% to 0% *Numeracy Rate Report
Grades 1 -3 within 3 years.
Learners
Table 9. Project Monitoring Plan
Scheduled Dates of Monitoring

Mid – year: July 2020 Year – end: December 2020
Accomplish- Issues/
Name of Project Project Objectives Date of ments/Status Problems/ Recommen- Signature
Monitoring to Data Challenge dations of SPT
QUALITY
LET’S GET To increase the NAT June 2019 –

HIGH IN NAT MPS 35.54% to 75% in 3 April 2022
years.
LEARN TO To decrease the number June 2019 –

READ, READ of frustration readers April 2022
TO LEARN from 12 out of 109 pupils
to 0 by year 2022.
FUN IN MATH To decrease the number June 2019 –

of non-numerates in April 2022
Grades 1-3 from 134 out

31
of 134 pupils in the Early
Grade Mathematics
Assessment (EGMA) to
0 by year 2022.
GOVERNANCE
Project CEM *To enhance school JANUARY
(Construct environment by 50% 2020 –
Enhance through landscaping, DECEMBER
Maintain) mural painting, repair of 2022
school office and
makeshift classrooms,
develop the area of
school ground for
educational recreation
activities, and construct
plant boxes for Gulayan
sa Paaralan Project by
the end of S.Y. 2019-
2020.
Table 10. Annual Work Financial Plan (AWFP)
ANNUAL WORK FINANCIAL PLAN (AWFP)

MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN
APALAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
CY 2020
PROGRAMS/ PHYSICAL FINANCIAL

INDICATOR
PROJECTS MEANS OF
(OUTPUT-
VERY HIGH LEVEL)
VERIFICATION
PRIORITY YEAR 1 YEAR 1
PROVISION OF
TARGET
TARGET
% ACMP
% ACMP
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACCESS/QUALITY/
GOVERNANCE
QUALITY
NAT Result 15,000
To increase
the NAT
LET’S GET HIGH IN
MPS
NAT

32
35.54% to
75% in 3
years.
To decrease
LEARN TO READ the number of
frustration Phil-IRI
READ TO LEARN
readers from
11% or 12 out and 75% 8,000
of 109 pupils
to 0 by year NAT Results
2022.
To decrease
the number of
FUN IN MATH non-
numerates in
Grades 1-3 EGMA
from 134 out
of 134 pupils
and 75% 11,500
in the Early
Grade
Mathematics NAT Results
Assessment
(EGMA) to 0
by year 2020.
SUB-TOTAL (2) 50,000
GOVERNANCE
50% 379, 950
To enhance *Actual
school improvement of
environment school facilities
PROJECT CEM by 50% *Narrative
(Construct Enhance through Reports
and Maintain) landscaping,
mural
*Pictures
painting,
repair of
school office
and makeshift
classrooms,
develop the
area of school
ground for
educational
recreation
activities,
construct
plant box for
Gulayan sa
Paaralan

33
Project by the
end of SY
2019-2020.
SUB-TOTAL (3) 379,950
GRAND TOTAL 441,950
ATTESTATION
WE, the Members of the School-Community Planning Team of APALAN ELEMENTARY

SCHOOL, Apalan, Tuburan, Cebu, Philippines, hereby attest, affirm and certify that the foregoing
School Improvement Plan (SIP) underwent thorough considerations, discussions and deliberation of
the Team.
WE further attest that all of the priorities, programs and interventions identified, incorporated
and planned in the SIP are true, correct, and responsive to the needs of the school based on the
evidences gathered and analyzed by the Team.
IN WITNESS HEREOF, the members of the School-Community Planning Team (SPT)

affixed their signatures below this _____________________________________, at Apalan
Elementary School, Apalan,Tuburan, Cebu, Philippines.
MICHELLE P. QUIŇO JUNMAR C. QUIŇO

SPG Respresentative PTA Respresentative
RHEA MAR A. ANGTUD, ED.D., CESO VI

PULGENIO PONO ROSANNA B. ESTRERA
Community/LGU Representation Faculty Club Representative
RUTH B. TAMAYO
School Head/ Presiding Officer
==========================================================================

34
Republic of the Philippines
City/Municipality of ___________________ x x x
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before Me this ______ day of ________________,

________ in the City/Municipality of Tuburan, affiants exhibiting to me proof of their identities, to wit:
Name Proof of Identity Issued On
_____________________________ ________________________ ____________

_____________________________ ________________________ ____________
_____________________________ ________________________ ____________
_____________________________ ________________________ ____________
_____________________________ ________________________ ____________

35

Apalan ES ESIP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Apalan ES ESIP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

APALAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

School Improvement Plan

RUTH BRACERO TAMAYO

School Improvement Plan

LIST OF TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS v

CHAPTER 1: DepEd Vision-Mission and Core Values

A. Clarity and Completeness of the Discussion on DepEd VMV 6

A. School’s Current Situation 10

A. List of Solutions 18-

A. Project Monitoring Report Forms 31-

School Improvement Plan

DepEd - Department of Education

School Improvement Plan

Table 1. List of SPT Members, their Roles and Functions 7-9

Illustration 1. Low MPS in National Achievement Test (Fish Bone) 13

School Improvement Plan

School Improvement Plan

NAME ROLE FUNCTIONS

School Improvement Plan

School Improvement Plan

Table 2. SPT Timetable of Activities

Secure/ gather the data needed. July 7, 2019

Organize data using the SCDT. July 14, 2019

Organize the School-Community Planning Team July 21, 2019

Conduct Focus Group Discussion (FGD) August 4, 2019

Interpret the data gathered August 5 – 7, 2019

Discuss the Root Cause August 18 – September 25, 2019

School Improvement Plan

Test the solutions October –December 2019

School Improvement Plan

2. B. Priority Improvement Areas

 Low NAT MPS Very High

School Improvement Plan

ACCESS AND QUALITY

Low English Literacy

To decrease the number of non- 0% 0% 0%

Table 5. List of Targets

Low NAT To increase 75% 75% 75%

School Improvement Plan

*Failed to create a system for quality

*Ineffective teaching pedagogies and

Low English *Lack of programs that provide 0% 0% 0%

*Lacks of programs that provide 60% 20% 0%

2. E. Root Cause Analysis

School Improvement Plan

Materials & Equipment People

Illustration 2: Low MPS in National Achievement Test

Because of non-mastery Because of inadequate

Why was Lack of opportunities to

Because teaching-learning Because of the lack of opportunities to

Illustration 3: Low MPS in National Achievement Test

School Improvement Plan

Non-mastery of skills Competencies are not Teaching-learning

Collaborative output Lack effective class

Intensify coaching and mentoring for teachers to

Illustration 3 presents that establishing a system on effective supervision and monitoring on

Illustration 4: Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners.

Materials & Equipment People

Feedbacks and Less exposure to English language in

Process /Procedure & Program

Lack of program that will

Illustration 5. Low English Literacy Rate of Grades 4-6 Learners.

Because the teachers failed to provide

Why do Why do pupils were not

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before Me this day of __________,

_________________