CASCADING OF

COMPLIANCE EVALUATION
PROCESS FOR
CPS/MPS/PPSC
December 28, 2015

Element of Compliance Stage

on

Formalization of Advisory
Council
Element 1

Elements of Compliance Stage

Formalization Advisory Council

Factor

Weight

Composition

20%

Regularity and Quality of Meetings

30%

Procedures and Documentation

15%

Issue/Advice Tracking, Resolution, and Monitoring

15%

Over-all Value-Adding Contributions

20%

Factor

Composition

Weigh
t

15%

Criteria

Diversity

Weight

15%

Measure

Source

No. of sectors
represented:
1. Government / LGU
2. Business
* Resumes
3. Education
* Oath-Taking
4. Religious
Document
5. Mass Media
* Profile
6. Community / Civil
Sector / NGOs /
Youth

Rating

Procedure

Requirement = 6
sectors
1 sector represented =
1
n = # sectors
represented

1-2

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

No. of sectors represented:

1. Government / LGU = 7
2. Business = 1
3. Education = 1
4. Religious = 4
5. Mass Media = 1
6. Community / Civil Sector / NGOs / Youth = 0

Factor

Weigh
t

Criteria

Commitment

Regularity and
Quality of
Meetings

Weig
ht

Measure

Procedure
5

Average attendance of
7% members in all the
meetings

Regular & Special

Meeting

7%

No. of meetings
conducted

High Attendance

6%

No. of meetings with

quorum

35%

*AAR

# Meetings attended vs #
scheduled

*Conference
Notices
*Invitations
Regular conduct = every 2
*AAR
months
* Minutes of the
Meetings
*AAR
*Attendance

Attendance of 50% + 1
Members

100- 80- 50- 3010-1%

81% 51% 31% 11%

5-4

2-3

1-2

100- 80- 50- 3010-1%

81% 51% 31% 11%

N/A

*AAR
*Minutes of the
# initiatives
meetings
designed/proposed
*Proposals/
Concept Papers

No. of resolutions
5%
sponsored

*Resolutions
*Other supporting # resolutions sponsored
documents

No. of Issues Raised/

Actionable Items
5%
Identified and
Documented

*AAR
*Minutes of the
Meetings
# issues raised/
*Actionable
actionable items
Items Arising
from the Meetings

5%

Quality of interaction
and oversight

Source

Rating

No. of PPAs
designed/proposed

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Measure

Source

Procedure
5

Proper documentation
of Meetings
Procedures and
documentation

Weight

Rating

5%

Percentage of meetings
with proper
*AAR
documentation

5%

Documents showing
formal oath- taking &
defining terms of
reference of the
members

10%
Procedures on
selection, succession,
and responsibilities

*Manuals
*TOR
*Oath of
Undertaking
*LetterInvitations

# AAR vs. #
100%
scheduled meetings

Selection criteria,
succession &
responsibility

Yes

80%

50%

30%

10%

No
evide
nce

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Factor

Weig
ht

Issue/advice
tracking, resolution, 20%
and monitoring

Criteria

Procedure in the
identification,
tracking, and
resolution of Issues
Raised/ Actionable
Items

Weigh
t

Measure

Source

Rating

Procedure
5

1 0

10%

Actions/interventions on
actionable items arising
from previous meetings

*AAR
*Minutes of the
Meetings
*Actionable Items # actionable items
Arising from the acted upon vs. #
Meetings
actionable items
*Action Plans/
Document re
Action Taken

100%

80%

50%

30% 10% 0

10%

Resolutions adopted vs.

Resolutions sponsored

*Resolutions
# resolutions adopted
*Other supporting vs # resolutions
100%
documents
sponsored

80%

50%

30% 10% 0

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Strategic insights and

advice
Over-all Valueadding
contributions

20%

Other contributions

Weigh
t

Measure

Source

Rating

Procedure

# initiatives
*Minutes of
adopted by the
Percentage of initiatives
Meetings
unit vs. #
7.5% adopted by the unit
*Proposals
initiatives
(against proposal)
*Interview with AC proposed by the
AC
Check availability
Performance Indicator/s * Updated
of supporting
are Positively Affected by Dashboard
* evidence for
7.5%
the Resolutions/ Initiatives Operations
positive- affected
Adopted
Review Matrix
performance
indicators
*MOA, MOU, Deed
Check availability
of Donation, etc
Existence of
of supporting
5%
*AAR
contributions/donations
evidence of
*Minutes of the
contribution
Meetings

5
10076%

752550-26%
51%
1%

N/A

No
eviden
ce

Yes

Yes

No
eviden
ce

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Element of Compliance Stage

on

Cascading of Strategy to
Individual Level
Element 2

Elements of Compliance Stage

Cascading of Strategy to Individual Level

Factor

Weight

Alignment of Scorecards

25%

Individual's understanding of contribution to the

unit and organization

25%

Regularity of the cascading process

25%

Formalization of the TWG

10%

Formalization of the PSMU

15%

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Consistency

Alignment of
Scorecards

Weight

12.5%

Measure

Source

12.5%

Procedure
5

c/o DPRM

Check DPRM
Certification of
100% Alignment of
IP Card to Individual
Scorecard

Yes

No

Alignment of Individual
Scorecard to Unit
c/o DPRM
Dashboard

Check whether
accomplishments in
Individual
Scorecard are
reflected in Unit
Scorecard and viceversa

Yes

No

Alignment of IP Cards
and Individual
Scorecard

25%

Updating

Rating

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Factor

Weig
ht

Extent of reach

Individual's
understanding of
contribution to the
unit and
organization

25%

Factor

Weig
ht

Regularity of the
cascading process

Criteria

Common understanding

25%

Criteria

Regular schedule

Weight

Measure

Source

Procedure

Rating
5

12.5%

*AAR
% of personnel having
*Attendance
attended cascading
*Roster of
sessions
Personnel

# of personnel who
attended cascading
sessions vs. total #
of personnel

100%

80%

50%

30%

10%

12.5%

% of personnel with
updated Individual
Scorecard

# of personnel with
updated ISC vs total 100%
# of personnel

80%

50%

30%

10%

Weight

25%

Measure

*Individual
Scorecard

Source

% of subordinate
*AAR
units/offices cascaded to

Procedure

Rating
5

# of units/offices
cascaded to vs total # 100%
of units/offices

80%

50%

30%

10%

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Random interviews with both uniformed and uniformed personnel at different levels can be
helpful in validating Extent of Reach, Common Understanding and Regularity of
Cascading.
A major output or expected result of cascading is compliance to the Individual Scorecard
requirement. All personnel are expected to have Individual Scorecards.

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Weight

Measure

Organization

7%

Proof of organization
through issuance of
appropriate orders

Regular Meeting

5%

No. of meetings
conducted

Formalization of the
12%
TWG

Source

Procedure

Rating
5

Check if all TWG

members are
*Updated list of covered by
TWG Members appropriate orders 100%
*Orders
designating them as
members of the
TWG

*AAR

Regular conduct =
at least 1/month

12

80%

50%

30%

10%

9-11

6-8

3-5

1-2

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

After-activity reports with other supporting documents (minutes-of-the-meeting, notice-ofmeeting, photographs) on TWG meetings held are important, but other similar forms of
documentation (ex. audio/video recording, social media, press release/validation, unit/office
command/staff conferences wherein it is indicated in the AAR, minutes-of-the-meeting that the
PNP P.A.T.R.O.L Plan 2030 was a key agenda or major point of discussion) can also be given
credit or equivalency.

Factor

Weig
ht

Formalization of the
13%
PSMU

Criteria

Weight

Measure

Source

Rating

Procedure
5

Organization

5%

Adequately- manned/
staffed PSMU

3%

Existence of PSMU
Office Facility

5%

% of PSMU personnel
with PGS-related
trainings

*Staffing
Pattern/Orders

% fill-up of PSMU
based on prescribed
100%
Organizational
Structure

*Onsite Visit

Check existence of
office facility for the
PSMU (Official/
Designated)

*Personnel (Training)
profile

# of PSMU
personnel with PGSrelated training vs. 100%
total # PSMU
personnel

Yes

80%

50%

30%

10%

No

80%

50%

30%

10%

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

Element of Compliance Stage

on

Alignment of Budget to Strategy

Element 3

Elements of Compliance Stage

Alignment of Resources to Strategy

Factor

Weight

Alignment Strategy

10%

Allocation of Resources to Initiatives

40%

Implementation

50%

Factor

Alignment
Strategy

Wei
ght

10%

Criteria

Consistency

Weigh
t

10%

Rating
Measure

Source Procedure

Final
Score
Score
(R
x
CW)
0
(criteria)

Check if all
initiatives are
reflected in the
AOPB,
*AOPB
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%
No. of Activities
Initiative
*MOOE
0%
With Allocated
Profile
91%- 90%- 70%- 50%- 30%*Program of
Budget
* MOUs, MOAs, 100% 71% 51% 31% 1%
Expenditure
Deed of
Donation,
Terms of
Reference, etc.

Computation for

ALIGNMENT STRATEGY FACTOR

Criterion: Consistency

Example:

- Total No. of Initiatives/ Activities : 18

- No. of Initiatives/ Activities reflected in the AOPB: 5

Sample Computation:
=

No. of initiatives/ activities reflected in the AOPB

=
=

Total no. of
initiatives/activities

18
0.2777

100%

28%

Weigh
Wei
Factor
Criteria
Measure Source
t
ght

Allocation
of
Resources
to
Initiatives/
Activities

40%

Rating

Procedure

Percentage *MOOE Allocated 100%

Adequacy 20% of allocated
Budget VS 91%budget
*Program Unit Budget 100%
of
Expenditu
re

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
90%-71% 70%-51% 50%-31% 30%-1%

Score

Final
Score

(R x CW)

(criteria
)

Computation for

ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES TO
INITIATIVES/ ACTIVITIES FACTOR
Criterion: Adequacy
Example:

- Total Budget Allocated to Initiatives: P25,000,000.00

- Total Units Budget: P50,000,000.00

Sample Computation:
Total Budget Allocated to Initiatives/ Activities
=
Total Units Budget
=

P25,000,000.00
P50,000,000.00

= 0.5

100%

50%

Weigh
Measur
Factor
Criteria Weight
Source
t
e

Adequacy
Allocation
of
Resources
to
Initiatives/
Activities

20%

40%

20%

Rating
5

Percentag
Allocated 100%
*MOOE Budget
e of
allocated
VS Unit 91%*Program
budget
Budget 100%
of
Expenditu
re
# of
Initiatives
No. of
with
Initiatives *Initiatives
Allocation
Allocated
with
VS # of
Allocation
Initiatives
*AOPB

Completene
ss

Procedur
e

100%
91%100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
90%-71% 70%-51% 50%-31% 30%-1%

80%

60%

40%

Final
Score
(criteria
(R x CW)
)
Score

20%
0%

90%-71% 70%-51% 50%-31% 30%-1%

Computation for

ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES TO
INITIATIVES FACTOR
Criterion: Completeness

Example:

- No. of Initiatives with Allocation: 15

- Total No. of Initiatives : 18
Sample Computation:
No. of Initiatives/ Activities with Allocation
=

=
=

Total No. of initiatives/

activities
15

18
0.8333

100%

83%

Factor

We
igh
t

Criteria

Timeliness
Implementation 50% Consistent
Monitoring

Weigh
t

Rating
Measure

Source Procedure

Final
Score
Score
0 (R x CW) (criteria)

Check if the
*Program of
implementatio
Expenditure
100
Timeliness in the
n of the
10%
50%
0
30%
80% %
20% Conduct of
activities is
dela
dela
*Accomplis
delay
delay
delay del
Activities
monitored and
y
y
hment
ay
regularly
Reports
updated

Computation for

IMPLEMENTATION FACTOR

Criterion: Timeliness and Consistent

Monitoring

Example:
- No. of Initiatives/ activities NOT Funded on Time

- No. of Initiatives/ Activities Funded on Time

Sample Computation:
=

No. of Initiatives/ Activities NOT Funded on Time

No. of Initiatives/
Activities Funded on
1
= Time
15

= 0.06

100%

6%

Factor

We
igh
t

Criteria

Timeliness
Consistent
Monitoring
Implementation 50%
Efficient Total
Allocation
for
Initiatives cy

Weigh
t

Rating
Measure

Source Procedure

Check if the
*Program of
implementatio
Expenditur
Timeliness in the
n of the
e
20% Conduct of
activities is
*Accomplis
Activities
monitored and
hment
regularly
Reports
updated
*AOPB
*MOOE
*Liquidatio
amount spent
Allocation vs
n Reports
20%
vs. amount
spending
*Releases,
allocated
other
supporting
documents

Final
Score
Score
(R
x
CW)
0
(criteria)

100
10%
50% 80%
0
30%
%
dela
dela dela
delay
delay
del
y
y
y
ay

100% 80% 60% 40% 20%

91%- 90%- 70%- 50%- 30%100% 71% 51% 31% 1%

0%

Computation for

IMPLEMENTATION FACTOR
Criterion: Efficiency
Example:

- Total Amount Spent for Initiatives: P35,000,000.00

- Total Allocation for Initiatives : P25,000,000.00

Sample Computation:
Total Amount Spent for Initiatives/ Activities
=
Total Allocation for Initiatives/
Activities
P35,000,000.00
= P25,000,000.00
= 1.4

100%

140
%

Factor

We
igh
t

Criteria

Timeliness
Consistent
Monitoring

Efficiency
Implementation 50%

Transparency

Weigh
t

Rating
Measure

Source Procedure

Final
Score
Score
0 (R x CW)
(criteria)

Check if the
*Program of
implementatio
Expenditure
100
Timeliness in the
n of the
10%
50%
0
30%
80% %
20% Conduct of
activities is
dela
dela
*Accomplis
delay
delay
delay del
Activities
monitored and
y
y
hment
ay
regularly
Reports
updated
*AOPB
*MOOE
*Liquidation
amount spent 100% 80% 60% 40% 20%
Allocation vs
Reports
0%
20%
vs. amount
91%- 90%- 70%- 50%- 30%spending
*Releases,
allocated
100% 71% 51% 31% 1%
other
supporting
documents
Check if the
*AOPB
budget or
*Availability and *MOOE
allocated
accessibility to *Liquidation
resources of
budgetary
Reports
10%
the unit is
YES - NO
documents
*Releases,
reported
*Reporting of
other
during
Accomplishments supporting
meetings/confe
documents
rences

Computation for

IMPLEMENTATION FACTOR
Criterion: Transparency
Example:

- If the Units Budget is reported during conferences

- If personnel are aware how much their budget is

- If budgetary documents are readily available

Then,on the Strategic Initiatives perspective

YE the Unit is
Transparent.
S,

Element of Compliance Stage

on

Review of Dashboard
Accomplishment
Element 4

Elements of Compliance Stage

Review of Dashboard Accomplishments

Factor

Weight

Reporting

30%

Monitoring

30%

Assessment

40%

We
Wei
Factor
Criteria ig
ght
ht

Timeliness

Rating
Measure

Timely submission
of the ff documents:
15 a) Updated
% Dashboard; b)
Operations Review
Report

Source

*AAR; Minutes of
Meetings;
Attendance Sheet;
Action Photos

*Dashboard; Tabular
breakdown/ recap of
data;
Accomplishment
Reporting 30%
Report (Monthly,
Quarterly, & Annual)
Supporting
Accuracy and 15
Submitted to Higher
documents for actual
Reliability
%
Unit/ Office &
accomplishments
Submitted by
Subordibate Units;
Other Regular
Reports Submitted
to Higher Units/
Offices

Procedure

Final
Score
Score
0 (R x CW) (criteria)

More
Aging of
than No
submission
2nd rd
4th
st
1 wk
3 wk
a rep
after the actual
wk
wk
mont ort
conduct
h

# of supporting
documents on
actual
accomplishme
nts per
Performance
Indicator vs #
of Performance
Indicator

0.7-. 0.4- 0.20-0.2

9 0.7 0.4

No
supp
ortin
g
evide
nce

SOUTHERN LEYTE PPO OPERATIONAL DASHBOARD

Prima
ry Secondary
Driver Drivers
s

Ob
jec
tiv
e
1:
Cri
me
Pr
ev
en
tio
n

En
ha
nc
e
Co
m
mu
nit
y
En
ga
ge
me
nt

Intensify
community
awareness/
information
activities

TARGETS

10,163

Process Improvement
From

ACCOMP
4th QUATER
CY 2014
9,562

PI

To

Limited
Broader
access to
access to
police related
information
information

(+/-)
VAR

-601

Target

BL
2013
2014

Number of
community
awareness
activities
initiated

10,058

10,163

Impact of Process Shift on

Crime Prevention

2015

2016

10,286

10,409

Cross Match with

SD, PI, T, A

Contributory to :
Increased awareness and
active community participation

PI

OP
OP
Critical Action
R
R

Activities

FR
(Php)

2017

10,532

a. Conduct more
Brgy PulongAssigned trained
pulong.
personnel as
b. PNP-media corps
PC members of
PC forum/fellowship.
R speakers bureau. R/A
c. School & home
DMI visitation
N
d. Distribution of
information
materials.

6
228,000.0
0

Identification of
Gaps/Success
Factors

Intervention Resulting in
breakthrough/transformative
outcomes

Lack of training of PNP

personnel for the
conduct of different
activities

Send PNP Personnel for training.

Conduct Self Review to sustain the
conduct of Pulong-pulong dialogue
with local officials, PNP-media
forum corps forum/fellowship,
School & Home Visitation and
Distribution of Leaflets

W
Wei
Factor
Criteria eig
ght
ht

Monitoring 30% Regularity

Rating
Measure

Source

Nr of Operations
Review Matrix and
30
*Operations Review
AAR etc
%
Matrix
completed/submitte
d

Procedure
5
# of updated
operations
review matrix
vs. # of
Performance
Indicator

0.7-. 0.4- 0.20-0.2

9 0.7 0.4

Final
Score
Score
(R x CW)
0
(criteria)
No
supp
ortin
g
evide
nce

SOUTHERN LEYTE PPO OPERATIONAL DASHBOARD

Prima
ry Secondary
Driver Drivers
s

Ob
jec
tiv
e
1:
Cri
me
Pr
ev
en
tio
n

En
ha
nc
e
Co
m
mu
nit
y
En
ga
ge
me
nt

Intensify
community
awareness/
information
activities

TARGETS

10,163

Process Improvement
From

ACCOMP
4th QUATER
CY 2014
9,562

PI

To

Limited
Broader
access to
access to
police related
information
information

(+/-)
VAR

-601

Target

BL
2013
2014

Number of
community
awareness
activities
initiated

10,058

10,163

Impact of Process Shift on

Crime Prevention

2015

2016

10,286

10,409

Cross Match with

SD, PI, T, A

Contributory to :
Increased awareness and
active community participation

PI

OP
OP
Critical Action
R
R

Activities

FR
(Php)

2017

10,532

a. Conduct more
Brgy PulongAssigned trained
pulong.
personnel as
b. PNP-media corps
PC members of
PC forum/fellowship.
R speakers bureau. R/A
c. School & home
DMI visitation
N
d. Distribution of
information
materials.

6
228,000.0
0

Identification of
Gaps/Success
Factors

Intervention Resulting in
breakthrough/transformative
outcomes

Lack of training of PNP

personnel for the
conduct of different
activities

Send PNP Personnel for training.

Conduct Self Review to sustain the
conduct of Pulong-pulong dialogue
with local officials, PNP-media
forum corps forum/fellowship,
School & Home Visitation and
Distribution of Leaflets

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Wei
ght

Measure

40%

Impact on
objectives

Success Factors

10%

Procedure
5

Impact on targets 10% Attainment of targets

Assessment

Source

Rating

Nr of lag measures with

attained targets

*Dashboard; Tabular
breakdown/ recap of data;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Submitted to
Higher Unit/ Office &
Submitted by Subordibate
Units; Other Regular
Reports Submitted to
Higher Units/ Offices

# of Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs. total
nr of Performance
Indicator

*Dashboard;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Received by
Higher Unit/ Office; Other
Regular Reports Submitted
to Higher Units/ Offices

# of lag
Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs total nr
of lag Performance
Indicator

# of identified
Nr of identified key success
success factors vs.
5%
*Operations Review Matrix
factors
# accomplished
target

Nr of identified gaps
*constraints
Corrective actions 15%
*limitations
*lessons learned

*Operations Review Matrix

# of resolved gaps
vs # identified gaps

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

SOUTHERN LEYTE PPO OPERATIONAL DASHBOARD

Prima
ry Secondary
Driver Drivers
s

Ob
jec
tiv
e
1:
Cri
me
Pr
ev
en
tio
n

En
ha
nc
e
Co
m
mu
nit
y
En
ga
ge
me
nt

Intensify
community
awareness/
information
activities

TARGETS

10,163

Process Improvement
From

ACCOMP
4th QUATER
CY 2014
9,562

PI

To

Limited
Broader
access to
access to
police related
information
information

(+/-)
VAR

-601

Target

BL
2013
2014

Number of
community
awareness
activities
initiated

10,058

10,163

Impact of Process Shift on

Crime Prevention

2015

2016

10,286

10,409

Cross Match with

SD, PI, T, A

Contributory to :
Increased awareness and
active community participation

PI

OP
OP
Critical Action
R
R

Activities

FR
(Php)

2017

10,532

a. Conduct more
Brgy PulongAssigned trained
pulong.
personnel as
b. PNP-media corps
PC members of
PC forum/fellowship.
R speakers bureau. R/A
c. School & home
DMI visitation
N
d. Distribution of
information
materials.

6
228,000.0
0

Identification of
Gaps/Success
Factors

Intervention Resulting in
breakthrough/transformative
outcomes

Lack of training of PNP

personnel for the
conduct of different
activities

Send PNP Personnel for training.

Conduct Self Review to sustain the
conduct of Pulong-pulong dialogue
with local officials, PNP-media
forum corps forum/fellowship,
School & Home Visitation and
Distribution of Leaflets

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Wei
ght

Measure

40%

Impact on
objectives

Success Factors

10%

Procedure
5

Impact on targets 10% Attainment of targets

Assessment

Source

Rating

Nr of lag measures with

attained targets

*Dashboard; Tabular
breakdown/ recap of data;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Submitted to
Higher Unit/ Office &
Submitted by Subordibate
Units; Other Regular
Reports Submitted to
Higher Units/ Offices

# of Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs. total
nr of Performance
Indicator

*Dashboard;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Received by
Higher Unit/ Office; Other
Regular Reports Submitted
to Higher Units/ Offices

# of lag
Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs total nr
of lag Performance
Indicator

# of identified
Nr of identified key success
success factors vs.
5%
*Operations Review Matrix
factors
# accomplished
target

Nr of identified gaps
*constraints
Corrective actions 15%
*limitations
*lessons learned

*Operations Review Matrix

# of resolved gaps
vs # identified gaps

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

SOUTHERN LEYTE PPO OPERATIONAL DASHBOARD

Prima
ry Secondary
Driver Drivers
s

Ob
jec
tiv
e
1:
Cri
me
Pr
ev
en
tio
n

En
ha
nc
e
Co
m
mu
nit
y
En
ga
ge
me
nt

Intensify
community
awareness/
information
activities

TARGETS

10,163

Process Improvement
From

ACCOMP
4th QUATER
CY 2014
9,562

PI

To

Limited
Broader
access to
access to
police related
information
information

(+/-)
VAR

-601

Target

BL
2013
2014

Number of
community
awareness
activities
initiated

10,058

10,163

Impact of Process Shift on

Crime Prevention

2015

2016

10,286

10,409

Cross Match with

SD, PI, T, A

Contributory to :
Increased awareness and
active community participation

PI

OP
OP
Critical Action
R
R

Activities

FR
(Php)

2017

10,532

a. Conduct more
Brgy PulongAssigned trained
pulong.
personnel as
b. PNP-media corps
PC members of
PC forum/fellowship.
R speakers bureau. R/A
c. School & home
DMI visitation
N
d. Distribution of
information
materials.

6
228,000.0
0

Identification of
Gaps/Success
Factors

Intervention Resulting in
breakthrough/transformative
outcomes

Lack of training of PNP

personnel for the
conduct of different
activities

Send PNP Personnel for training.

Conduct Self Review to Sustain the
conduct of Pulong-pulong dialogue
with local officials, PNP-media
forum corps forum/fellowship,
School & Home Visitation and
Distribution of Leaflets

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Wei
ght

Measure

40%

Impact on
objectives

Success Factors

10%

Procedure
5

Impact on targets 10% Attainment of targets

Assessment

Source

Rating

Nr of lag measures with

attained targets

*Dashboard; Tabular
breakdown/ recap of data;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Submitted to
Higher Unit/ Office &
Submitted by Subordibate
Units; Other Regular
Reports Submitted to
Higher Units/ Offices

# of Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs. total
nr of Performance
Indicator

*Dashboard;
Accomplishment Report
(Monthly, Quarterly, &
Annual) Received by
Higher Unit/ Office; Other
Regular Reports Submitted
to Higher Units/ Offices

# of lag
Performance
Indicator that met
the target vs total nr
of lag Performance
Indicator

# of identified
Nr of identified key success
success factors vs.
5%
*Operations Review Matrix
factors
# accomplished
target

Nr of identified gaps
*constraints
Corrective actions 15%
*limitations
*lessons learned

*Operations Review Matrix

# of resolved gaps
vs # identified gaps

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.7-.9 0.4-0.7

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0.20.4

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

0-0.2

No
suppor
ting
eviden
ce

Score
(R x CW)

Final Score
(criteria)

SOUTHERN LEYTE PPO OPERATIONAL DASHBOARD

Prima
ry Secondary
Driver Drivers
s

Ob
jec
tiv
e
1:
Cri
me
Pr
ev
en
tio
n

En
ha
nc
e
Co
m
mu
nit
y
En
ga
ge
me
nt

Intensify
community
awareness/
information
activities

TARGETS

10,163

Process Improvement
From

ACCOMP
4th QUATER
CY 2014
9,562

PI

To

Limited
Broader
access to
access to
police related
information
information

(+/-)
VAR

-601

Target

BL
2013
2014

Number of
community
awareness
activities
initiated

10,058

10,163

Impact of Process Shift on

Crime Prevention

2015

2016

10,286

10,409

Cross Match with

SD, PI, T, A

Contributory to :
Increased awareness and
active community participation

PI

OP
OP
Critical Action
R
R

Activities

FR
(Php)

2017

10,532

a. Conduct more
Brgy PulongAssigned trained
pulong.
personnel as
b. PNP-media corps
PC members of
PC forum/fellowship.
R speakers bureau. R/A
c. School & home
DMI visitation
N
d. Distribution of
information
materials.

6
228,000.0
0

Identification of
Gaps/Success
Factors

Intervention Resulting in
breakthrough/transformative
outcomes

Lack of training of PNP

personnel for the
conduct of different
activities

Send PNP Personnel for training.

Conduct Self Review to Sustain the
conduct of Pulong-pulong dialogue
with local officials, PNP-media
forum corps forum/fellowship,
School & Home Visitation and
Distribution of Leaflets

Element of Compliance Stage

on

ImPlan to ComPlan
Element 5

Elements of Compliance Stage

Implementation of the Communications Plan

Factor

Weight

Active Communication of Strategy

30%

Mechanisms to gauge awareness and

understanding

30%

Effectiveness of Communication

40%

Rating
Factor

Weigh
Criteria
t

Weight

Measure

Source

Use of quad media tools

Variety of
*Accomplishment reports
Print
Communica
*AAR
15% TV
tion
*Validate online engagement
Radio
Channels
*Other supporting documents
Social Media

Active
Commu
nication
30%
of
Reach to
7.5% Themes & Messages
Strateg
external and
*Implan (PRO/PPO*
Developed
y
internal
Accomplishment reports
stakeholder
*AAR
7.5% Sectoral Areas Covered
s

Procedure

Number of potential quad

media tools in the AOR over 100%number of quad media tools 95%
utilized
Themes and messages
100%developed over themes and
95%
messages delivered
Number of sectors identified
100%over number of sectors
95%
engaged

94%85%

65%84%

35%64%

No
1%- suppo
rting
34% eviden
ce

94%85%

65%84%

35%64%

1%34%

94%85%

65%84%

35%64%

1%34%

Final
Score
Score
(R x
(criter
CW)
ia)

Rating
Factor

Crite
Weight
Weight
ria

Exist
Mechanism
ence 15%
s to gauge
of
awareness
feedb
30%
and
ack
understand
syste
ing
m 15%

Measure

Source

*AAR
e-Learning Passers
*e-Learning
(Basic)
Certificate
After-CES Report
Completion of
*Trust
Community
*Respect
Engagement Survey *Safety and
security

Procedure

Personnel completion of
the Basic e-Learning

C/o CPSM

100%

80%

50%

30%

10%

No supporting
evidence

Strongly
agree

Strongl
Modera
y
Agree tely Disagree
Disagre
Agree
e

Score Final
(R x
Score
CW) (criteria)

Rating
Facto Weig Criteri
Weight
r
ht
a

Measure

Effectivess of feedback systems and

processes
*Workplace (Facility, equipment, physical
structure)
Correc
*People (Designated)
tive 20%
*Process (Clear, established system in
Effect
Action
dealing with customer feedback,maintenance
ivene
s/
of unit/office website)
ss of
Effecti
*Partnership (Unit and community
Com 40%
veness
mobilization)
muni
of
catio
Feedb
n
ack
system
No. of news clippings and videos captured
20%
and featured by multi-media

Source

Procedure

Check satisfaction of each

*On-site visit
criteria
*Personnel Interview
*Memo directive creating
# satisfied criteria vs. 4
a feedback system
criteria

Insuffi
cient
100% 75% 50% 25%
0%
eviden
ce

*News
*Video clips

Insuffi
cient
100% 75% 50% 25%
0%
eviden
ce

# featured stories vs. #

media releases

Final
Score
Score
(R x
(criter
CW)
ia)

QSL

Element of Compliance Stage

on

Collation of Emerging Best

Practices
Element 6

Elements of Compliance Stage

Collation of Emerging Best Practices

Factor

Weight

Identification

40%

Implementation

40%

Sustainability

20%

Factor

Identification

Weig
ht

Criteria

Weig
ht

Measure

Source

Rating
Procedure

Proper Identification of
Best Practices

No. of initiated activities

with potential to be
20%
considered an emerging
best practice

1.After-Activity
Reports
2.Project Fact
Sheets

Proper Documentation
of Best Practices

% of emerging Best
Practice Reports
20%
Documented according to
prescribed format/

*Project Fact Sheet

(For initiatives
Review of Project Fact
implemented beyond Sheets
May 19, 2014)

40%

Review of Project Fact

Sheets

4 and above

2-3

No initiated
activities

60%
[51%-70%]

40%
[31%-50%]

100%
80%
[91%-100%] [71%-90%]

20%
No Project Fact
Sheet
[1%-30%]

For Field Units lower than Regional Offices

Factor

Weig
ht

Criteria

Dissemination
Implementation

40%

Wei
ght

Measure

Source

Rating
Procedure

Accomplishment
Reports & other
% of disseminated EBPs
10%
Supporting
implemented in the unit
documents; Onsite
visits & Interviews

# implemented EBPs in
the unit vs. #
disseminated EBPs by
the PPO/CPO

% of personnel
10% knowledgeable of the
EBPs

Random Interview

# of randomly
interviewed personnel
that are knowledgeable
vs total # of randomlyinterviewed personnel

*Endorsement
Memo

Review of emerging best

practices endorsed to
Higher Headquarters

# of emerging Best
Practices endorsed to
Proper Endorsement to
20% Higher Headquarters
Higher Headquarter
against # of identified
emerging best practice

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

91%-100%

71%-90%

51%-70%

31%-50%

1%-30%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

91%-100%

71%-90%

51%-70%

31%-50%

1%-30%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

91%-100%

71%-90%

51%-70%

31%-50%

1%-30%

0
0%

0%

Identified
emerging best
practices not
endorsed

Factor

Sustainability

Weig
ht

20%

Criteria

Active Best Practice

Officer

Weig
ht

Measure

Designation of Best
20% Practice Officer and with
accomplishments

Source

*Memo
*Order
*AAR

Procedure

Review of supporting
documents

Rating
5

Presence of an
Best practice
Best practice
Officer
officer with
Best Practice
officer
monitoring BP No designated
formal order;
Officer
designated but but with no
best practice
identifying and designated (with
with no formal designation
officer
Implementing formal order)
order
and formal
projects
order

Thank You