Performance Indicators

Rating
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Weight Outstanding Very Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor Actual Results Ave Score
QET
(5) Satisfactory (4) (3) (2) (1) Q E T
Basic Education 4. Assessment 12.Communica Quality Consistently Frequently showed Occasionally Rarely showed No acceptable #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Services and Reporting ted promptly and showed prompt and prompt and clear showed prompt and prompt and clear evidence was
clearly the clear communication of clear communication of shown
learners’ needs, communication of the learners’ needs, communication of the learners’ needs,
progress and the learners’ needs, progress and the learners’ needs, progress and
achievement to progress and achievement to key progress and achievement to key
key stakeholders, achievement to key stakeholders, achievement to key stakeholders,
including parents/ stakeholders, including parents/ stakeholders, including parents/
guardians. including parents/ guardians as including parents/ guardians as
guardians as shown in the MOV guardians as shown in the MOV
7.5% shown in the MOV submitted shown in the MOV submitted
submitted submitted

Efficiency Submitted a Submitted a Submitted a Submitted any 1 of No acceptable

combination of at combination of 3 of combination of 2 of the given MOV evidence was
least 4 of the the acceptable the acceptable shown
acceptable MOV MOV MOV
Timeliness Submitted MOV Submitted MOV Submitted MOV Submitted MOV No acceptable
were distributed were distributed were distributed was completed in evidence was
across 4 quarters across 3 quarters across 2 quarters only 1 quarter shown
Basic Education 5. Plus Factor 13. Performed Quality Consistently Frequently Occasionally Rarely performed No acceptable #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Services various related performed various performed various performed various various related evidence was
works/activities related related related work/activities that shown
that contribute to work/activities that work/activities that work/activities that contribute to the
the teaching- contribute to the contribute to the contribute to the teaching learning
learning process. teaching learning teaching learning teaching learning process as shown
process as shown process as shown process as shown in the MOV
10% in the MOV in the MOV in the MOV submitted
submitted submitted submitted

Efficiency Submitted at least 4 Submitted 3 Submitted 2 Submitted any 1 of No acceptable

different kinds of different kinds of different kinds of the acceptable evidence was
acceptable MOV acceptable MOV acceptable MOV MOV shown
Timeliness
RATING FOR OVER-ALL
#DIV/0! #DIV/0!
ACCOMPLISHMENTS

ADJECTIVAL RATING EQUIVALENCIES

RANGE ADJECTIVAL RATING
4.500-5.000 Outstanding
3.500-4.499 Very Satisfactory
2.500-3.499 Satisfactory
1.500-2.499 Unsatisfactory NAME OF THE TEACHER NAME OF THE RATER NAME OF THE APPROVING AUTHORITY
below 1.499 Poor Ratee Rater Approving Authority
 INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT REVIEW FORM (IPCRF) SUMMARY SHEET
Teacher I-III (Proficient Teacher)
Name of Employee: Name of Rater:
Position: Position:
Bureau/Center/Service/Division: Date of Review:
Rating Period:

Weight per Weight per Numerical Ratings

KRA Objectives Score
KRA Objective Q E T Ave
Objective 1 7.5% 5 4 4.500 0.337
KRA 1 22.5% Objective 2 7.5% 4 5 4.500 0.337
Objective 3 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 4 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 2 22.5% Objective 5 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 6 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 7 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 3 22.5% Objective 8 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 9 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 10 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 4 22.5% Objective 11 7.5% 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 12 7.5% 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Plus Factor 10% Objective 13 10% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Final Rating #DIV/0!
Adjectival Rating #DIV/0!

NAME OF THE RATEE NAME OF RATER NAME OF APPROVING AUTHORITY

Ratee Rater Approving Authority
 Performance Indicators
Rating
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Weight Outstanding Very Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor Actual Results Ave
QET
(5) Satisfactory (4) (3) (2) (1) Q E T
Basic Education 4. Assessment 11. Interpreted Quality Consistently Frequently Occasionally Rarely collaborated No acceptable #DIV/0!
Services and Reporting collaboratively collaborated with collaborated with collaborated with with colleagues in evidence was
monitoring and colleagues in the colleagues in the colleagues in the the interpretation of shown
evaluation strategies of interpretation of interpretation of interpretation of assessment data
attainment data to assessment data assessment data assessment data as shown in the
support learner as shown in the as shown in the as shown in the MOV submitted
7.5%
progress and MOV submitted MOV submitted MOV submitted
achievement.
Efficiency Submitted at least 2 Submitted at least 3 Submitted at least 2 Submitted any 1 of No acceptable
different types of of the same kind of of the same kind of the MOV evidence was
MOV MOV MOV shown
Timeliness
Basic Education 12. Applied skills in the Quality Consistently Frequently applied Occasionally Rarely applied skills No acceptable #DIV/0!
Services effective communication applied skills in the skills in the applied skills in the in the effective evidence was
of learner needs, effective effective effective communication of shown
progress and communication of communication of communication of learner needs and
achievement to key learner needs and learner needs and learner needs and progress to
stakeholders, including progress to progress to progress to parents/ guardians
parents/guardians. parents/ guardians parents/ guardians parents/ guardians as shown in the
7.5% as shown in the as shown in the as shown in the MOV submitted
MOV submitted MOV submitted MOV submitted

Efficiency Submitted at least 4 Submitted any 3 Submitted any 2 Submitted any 1

of the acceptable MOV MOV MOV
MOV
Timeliness
Basic Education 5. Plus Factor 13. Performed various Quality Consistently Frequently Occasionally Rarely performed No acceptable #DIV/0!
Services related works/activities performed special performed special performed special special tasks and/or evidence was
that contribute to the tasks and/or tasks and/or tasks and/or assignments as shown
teaching-learning assignments as assignments as assignments as shown in the MOV
process. shown in the MOV shown in the MOV shown in the MOV submitted
10% submitted submitted submitted
Efficiency Submitted at least 4 Submitted only 3 Submitted only 2 Submitted any 1 of No acceptable
different kinds of different kinds of different kinds of the acceptable evidence was
acceptable MOV acceptable MOV acceptable MOV MOV shown
Timeliness
RATING FOR OVER-ALL
#DIV/0!
ACCOMPLISHMENTS

ADJECTIVAL RATING EQUIVALENCIES

RANGE ADJECTIVAL RATING
4.500-5.000 Outstanding
3.500-4.499 Very Satisfactory
2.500-3.499 Satisfactory
1.500-2.499 Unsatisfactory NAME OF THE TEACHER NAME OF THE RATER NAME OF THE APPROVING AUTHORITY
below 1.499 Poor Ratee Rater Approving Authority
Score

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

#DIV/0!
NAME OF THE APPROVING AUTHORITY
Approving Authority
 INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT REVIEW FORM (IPCRF) SUMMARY SHEET
Master Teacher I-IV (Highly Proficient Teacher)

Name of Employee: Name of Rater:

Position: Position:
Bureau/Center/Service/Division: Date of Review:
Rating Period:

Weight per Weight per Numerical Ratings

KRA Objectives Score
KRA Objective Q E T Ave
Objective 1 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 1 22.5% Objective 2 7.5% 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 3 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 4 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 2 22.5% Objective 5 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 6 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 7 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 3 22.5% Objective 8 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 9 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 10 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
KRA 4 22.5% Objective 11 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Objective 12 7.5% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Plus Factor 10% Objective 13 10% 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Final Rating #DIV/0!
Adjectival Rating #DIV/0!

NAME OF THE RATEE NAME OF RATER NAME OF APPROVING AUTHORITY

Ratee Rater Approving Authority