SIP / AIP

(2021- 2022)

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City 1
DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2015
Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001
(RA 9155)
DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
 EVERY
CHILD,
EVERY
OPPORTUNITY

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
• Division of Davao City
• Division of Davao City

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City 5
 Division of OF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 6
 Annex 3 GAP ANALYSIS TEMPLATE
2.1

B. SCHOOL PERFORMANCE
B2. CURRENTLY CONTRIBUTING

A. DIVISION B4. B5. GROUPS

TARGETS B3. INHIBITING PROJECTS THAT
B1. DATA NEEDED
YES/NO EXPLANATION FACTORS IMPLEMENTE REQUIRE
D ATTENTION

1. School dropout rates High dropout rates due to the

over the previous three Overall dropout rates in school following:
Disadvantaged
Dropout Rate: 0.1% years No over the last three years have - financial matters  
students
2. Reasons for dropping not been lower than 4%. - health problems
out - disasters

School promotion rates Overall promotion rates over the Inhibiting factors still Younger learners,
Promotion Rate: 91% over the previous three No last three years have been undetermined from available   particularly those
years around 10% less than the target. data. from Grade 1.

l.  

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 7
 Annex 4 Identifying Priority Improvement Area
2.2

Strategic
Improvement Areas Urgency Magnitude Feasibility Average Interpretation  
Importance

High dropout rate 2 5 3 3 3.25 Moderate Priority  

Low promotion rate 1 5 5 4 3.75 High Priority  

Low English literacy 3 5 5 5 4.5 Very High Priority  

Flooding 4 5 3 2 3.5 High Priority  

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 8
 Annex 5 Planning Worksheet
3.1
PLANNING WORKSHEET for ACCESS and QUALITY

TIME FRAME
PRIORITY
LEARNING GENERAL
DEPED INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES IMPROVEMENT ROOT CAUSE/S
STAGE OBJECTIVE/S
AREA
SY__ SY__ SY__

IO1: Learners are in school and learning

      □ □ □
centers
IO2: Learners access programs responsive
to their needs and consistent with their
      □ □ □
interests and aptitudes

IO3: Learners enjoy learner-friendly

K-3       □ □ □
environment
IO4: Learners actively participate in their
learning environment       □ □ □

IO5: Learners attain learning standards       □ □ □

IO6: Learners are well-rounded, happy and       □ □ □

smart
IO1: Learners are in school and learning
      □ □ □
centers
IO2: Learners access programs responsive
to their needs and consistent with their
      □ □ □
interests and aptitudes

4-6 IO3: Learners enjoy learner-friendly

      □ □ □
environment
IO4: Learners actively participate in their
      □ □ □
learning environment
IO5: Learners attain learning standards       □ □ □
IO6: Learners are well-rounded, happy and smart
      □ □ □

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 9
 Project Team
3.2

Project Member Role Responsibilities

Team Leader

Scribe

Documenter

Process Observer

Communication Incharge

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 10
 Project Team
3.2

Project Member Role Responsibilities

Team Leader

Scribe

Documenter

Process Observer

Communication Incharge

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 11
 Division of OF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 12
Annex 6 Guidelines in Listening to the
Voice of Learners and other Stakeholders
3.3

 Facilitating and Probing

 Needs and Wants
 Data Gathering Tools
(e.g. Interview, Triad, FGD, survey)

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 13
Annex 7 Walk the Process Guidelines
3.4

 Brainstorm
 Conduct Interview
 Directly observe the process
 Create Flowchart

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 14
OBSERVATION REPORT
*Assume there’s only one English teacher in Grade 3
 
Grade: Grade 3
Subject: English
Number of sections: 2
Total number of students: 68
Period of observation: 5 days
Process observed: Teaching-Learning Process
 
Summary of observations:
 Teacher entered the room on time for 5 days.
 During the teacher’s arrival, students were still doing other things, some were standing and walking
 For each class, it took more than 10 minutes for the teacher to call the attention of the students and
instruct them to settle down.
 For each class, teacher recapped previous lesson for 30 seconds or less
 After the recap, teacher proceeded to discuss the lesson for each day. The lessons were anchored on a
story, “Jug the Bug.”
 During these discussions, 22 students out of the 68 were doodling on their notebooks per day.
 On Day 3, a sponsor arrived to distribute donated school supplies
 Teacher asked questions in between discussions (formative assessment)
 While the teacher was asking questions, 36 students out of the 68 were talking to their seatmates per day
 54 students out of the 68 gave the incorrect answer during recitation per day
 After recitation, teacher proceeded with the discussion of the lesson
 At the end of each class, teacher summarized the lesson for 30 seconds or less
 One class was pulled out for a school activity
 

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 15
 Sample Process Map w/ Storm Clouds
(Math Periodical Test Process)

Eight students were

Two answer
talking to their
sheets were
seatmates
missing

Answering the test

Preparing the Distributing the
START papers
test test papers
(test proper)

Checking the Recording the test Analyzing

END
test papers scores performance on items

10/30 students’ papers Only 2/30 students

had items that were correctly answered
erroneously checked the difficult items

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
 Select Area of Focus
3.5

In selecting you area of focus,

choose the one which, when
addressed, will clearly affect the PIA

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 17
 Investigating the Area of Focus

 
Area of focus: 79% of students (54 out of 68) answer incorrectly during recitation per day
Data sources: observation report on the teaching-learning process of Grade 3 English; other
observations noted during the teaching-learning process of Grade 3 English; interviews with Grade 3
students
 
Summary of investigations:
 Four students were seen not paying attention to the question. Two students were obviously
distracted, while two students said they could not hear the question. It was observed during their
classes that majority of students (53%) were talking to their seatmates per day, thus creating a noisy
environment.
 As discovered during interviews, ten students understood the question the teacher asked them but
they could not think of the correct answer. When probed further, eight of them said that they were
nervous either because they were not familiar with the words, because they were afraid of making
mistakes in front of the class, or because they were afraid of the teacher. Two students said they
were hungry during the recitation so they couldn’t think of the correct answer.
 Also discovered during interviews, forty students said they could not understand the question the
teacher asked them. Four of them said they could not make sense of the question because they were
distracted, while thirty-six students were not familiar with the words in the question. Of the thirty-
six students, most had limited vocabulary as observed during interviews, while the rest had better
vocabulary but were not familiar with the example in the question.

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 18
Annex 8 Root Cause Analysis Overview (RCA)
3.6

Steps What you will need Tools Outputs

1. Synthesize • School and Any of the A diagram

identified community data following: showing the
possible root • Flowchart of the  Fishbone possible root
causes school processes Diagram cause for each
relevant to each PIA  Why-why PIA
• Documentations Diagram
from FGDs,  Problem Tree
interviews or home
visit

2. Prioritize Step 1 output Prioritization List of priority root

root causes Rubrics causes for each
Area of focus

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 19
Activity 3.6: Do Root Cause Analysis
Approach 1: Fishbone Diagram

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Activity 3.6: Do Root Cause Analysis
Approach 2: Why-Why Diagram

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Activity 3.6: Do Root Cause Analysis

Approach 3: Problem Tree

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
 Present Root Cause to SPT
3.7

Present the following:

 Results of FGDs and interview with the
learners and stakeholders (and other relevant
quantitative data)
 The flowchart of the particular school process
observed, including the storm clouds
 Area of focus (focused problem statement)
 

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 23
 Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION
 Review General Objectives and Targets
Step 4

Developing Objectives
What is it “To do”
What do What
about the PIA on what? Time
PIA you want to “to Objective BL T
that made it (a.k.a. Period
happen? do”?
an IA? Indicator)

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 25
 Formulate Solutions
Step 5

Four considerations in formulating solutions:

 Should address the root cause/s
 Should be within the control of the school
 Should be economical
 Should be sustainable
 Should have the support of the concerned
stakeholders/process owners

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 26
Annex 9: Project Work Plan and Budget Matrix
Step 6

Project Title:
_______________________________________________________________
Problem Statement:
_______________________________________________________________
Project Objective Statement:
_______________________________________________________________
Root Cause:
_______________________________________________________________

Project Work Plan and Budget Matrix

Date of
Activity Output Person Responsible Budget Budget Source
Implementation

           

           

           

           

           

Note: Please record also the date of monitoring per project

Please attach this form to the AIP template
Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 27
 Write the SIP
Step 7

SIP DESIGN TEMPLATE

Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 28
Annex 10: The Annual Implementation Plan
Step 8

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City 29
DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
 Reporting

 The school provides the SDO a copy of its SIP on the

first year of the three-year cycle.

 A copy of the AIP for year 1 and the Project Monitoring

Report forms for year 3 (of the previous SIP cycle)
should be attached to this.

DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2015

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
 Reporting
 For years
5 Easy Steps
2 and 3, to Ruin
only theYour
AIP Finances
needs to be
passed to the SDO together with the
accomplished Project Monitoring Report forms
of the previous implementation plan.

DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2015

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
Year 1 –

R = SIP + AIP (Y1) + Project Monitoring Report

Forms (Y3) + year-end SRC

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
Year 2 –

R = AIP (Y2) + Project Monitoring Report Forms (Y1)

+ year-end SRC

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
Year 3

R = AIP (Y3) + Project Monitoring Report Forms (Y2)

+ year-end SRC

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
 Project Monitoring Report
Form

Scheduled Dates of Monitoring

Mid-year: ________________ Year-end: _______________

Name of Project Date of Accomplishme Issues/ Recommen- Signature of

Project Objective Monitoring nt Status to Problems/ dations SPT and
and Date Challenge Project Team
Targets s Leader

To be filled
by Project Team To be
discussed
by SPT and
Project
Team

SIP Guidebook p. 29

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
* Note that the year-end SRC is also submitted each year
to provide the SDO a summary of the progress of project
implementation and the status of the school.

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
* Note that the year-end SRC is also submitted each year
to provide the SDO a summary of the progress of project
implementation and the status of the school.

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
To provide the copy of the following:

Copy of eSRC-Final Version.xlsx

E-SRC as an Advocacy Tool.pptx
Program Design for the eSRC Orientation.pptx

DEPARTMENT
Division ofOF EDUCATION
Davao City
Public Schools District
Supervisors (PSDS),
together with trained
principals and teachers
from model schools, shall
serve as coaches to guide
the schools in crafting
and implementing the
SIPs in their area.

(D.O. No. 44, s. 2015)

Division ofo
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Davao City
Provide technical assistance in
the formulation of school plans
(e.g. SIP) and its adjustments by
conducting workshops, doing
follow-up through coaching and
providing appraisal and feedback
on their draft plans, so that all
schools can have approved plans
as basis for budgeting and
resourcing.
 
JOB Description – Version. 2
SDO_CID_Public Schools District Supervisor (Page 2 of 3)

Division ofo
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Davao City
Monitor SBM Level of
Practice through validation of
their documents and outputs
to determine areas for
development and possible
provision of technical
assistance to improve school
performance.
 
JOB Description – Version. 2
SDO_CID_Public Schools District Supervisor (Page 2 of 3)

Division ofo
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Davao City
 MARIA LUZ M. TAN, PhD
SGOD - EPS
Division ofOF
DEPARTMENT Davao City
EDUCATION 43