Sei sulla pagina 1di 20

Name of Employee: ________________________

Position: Principal 1
Review Period: June 2016-March 2017
School: _______________________
MFO KRAs OBJECTIVES TIMELINE WEIGHT
per KRA
Instructional Instructional Leadership June-March 40%
Improves learning outcomes through
supervision instructional supervision to all teachers at the
to achieve end of the school year
learning
outcomes
performed

classroom June-March

observation Conducts and submits 100 classroom


observation and monitoring at the end of the
& monitoring school year

conducted

Instructional Performs instructional supervision to enhance June-March


supervision curriculum implementation within the school year
performed
Checks teachers' Daily Lesson Logs (DLLs)/ June-March
lesson plans regularly

Collects and checks assessment tools.

Manages instructional system by assigning June-March


teachers where they best fit and organizes
special classes at the start of the year

child friendly Learning Environment Establishes systems for safe and child June-March 10%
school systems friendly learning and school environment
established for students for the whole school year
Physical Improves physical environment June-March
environment for student learning throughout the
improved school year

Technical Human Resource Provides technical assistance to June-March 20%


Assistance Management and teachers on matters pertaining to
provided Development enhancement of classroom mngt,
skills and instructional competence w/in
the school year

Provides assistance to tchrs. in the

reclassification/promotion/step increment/

service credits within the school year

Teachers' professional Collects and compiles teachers' professional June-March


documents in documents in portfolios through the use of
portfolios collected DIMES to update teacher's record and
and compiled performance every month.

School's Parents' Involvement Establishes partnership and support with 5%


stakeholders and Community stakeholders through their involvement June-March
partnership Partnership in different school activities
established
Meets parents regularly to confer/ Quarterly

inform about school policies, issues and

accomplishments through GPTA/HRPTA

Data-based School Leadership, Leads in the formulation & implementation 25%

strategic Management and of School Improvement Plan (SIP) June-March

planning Operations

performed

Sound school Performs School Leadership,

leadership & Management and Operations June-March


management functions within the School Year
performed
school Improve school performance within the June-March
performance school year in the following indicators:
improved enrolment rate
promotion rate
dropout rate

Prepares Action Research in a school year June-March

Conducts Action Research in a school year.

Ratee:
______________________________
Principal 1

Prepared by:

GERNIN S. LARAO MA. HELEN S. JARCIA


School Principal I School Principal I

DENNIS D. SILVA
School Principal III
INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT & REVIEW FORM
Name of Rater:
Position: ASDS
Date of Review: December 2016

WEIGHT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS


Obj QUALITY
10% 5- 3pts & above increased of NAT10 / 80% & above NAT 10 MPS
4- 2pts increased of NAT10 / 75% - 79% NAT 10 MPS
3- 1.5 pt. increased of NAT10
2- 1pt. increased of NAT10
1- 0.5pt.& below increased of NAT10

10.00% 5- 3 points increased from GSA baseline


4- 2.5 points increased from GSA baseline
3- 2 points increased from GSA baseline.
2- 1.5 point increased from GSA baseline.
1 - 1 point and below increased from GSA baseline

5% 5- 100% & above classroom observation following STAR

model w/agreement conducted at the end of school year

4- 86-99% classroom observation following STAR model

w/ agreement conducted at the end of school year

3- 75-85% classroom observations following STAR model


w/ agreement conducted at the end of school year
2- 65-74% classroom observations following STAR model
w/ agreement conducted at the end of school year
1- 64% & below classroom observations following STAR model
w/ agreement conducted at the end of school year
5% 5- * Collected, and utilized data to identify and plan
needed curriculum interventions
*Organized projects teams to plan and implement
curriculum interventions
*Developed and collected localized SIMs
*Organized appropriate classes to diverse students needs
*Adopted flexible learning options
4- 4 of 5 requirements satisfied (with evidences)
3- 3 of 5 requirements satisfied (with evidences)
2- Some requirements satisfied w/out evidences
1- requirements and reports largely missing

2% 5- Checked/monitored 100% of teachers' DLL/DLP


4- Checked/monitored 80-99% of DLL/DLP
3- Checked/monitored 60-79% of DLL/DLP
2- Checked/monitored 40-59% of DLL/DLP
1- Checked/monitored 39% & below of DLL/DLP

3% Appropriate assessment tools collected and checked:

* Test Questions prepared with TOS

* Test Questions followed the elements of

test construction ( stimulus material, STEM, options, distracters, correct answers.)


* Pretest and Post-test were administered in all classes/subject area

* Performance Rubrics prepared


* Alternative assessment prepared ( checklist, observation, focus group discussion,
interviews)
5- 5 tools collected and checked
4- 4 out of 5 tools collected and checked
3- 3 out of 5 tools collected and checked
2- 2 out of 5 tools collected and checked
1- 1 out of 5 tools collected and checked
5% 5-5 instructional systems managed(organization of classes,
assignment of teachers,special classes,master/class program,
teaching loads) with evidences
4- 4 of 5 requirements were satisfied
3- 3 of 5 requirements were satisfied
2- 2 of 5 requirements were satisfied
1- 1 of 5 requirements was satisfied

5% 5- 5 and above accomplishments on the following:


* Institutionalized CFSS
* Institutionalized Child Protection Policy
* Sustained Solid Waste Management
* Provided health and sanitation facilities
* Institutionalized GAD
* Institutionalized DRRM
4- 4 of 5 requirements established
3- 3 of 5 requirements established
2- 2 of 5 requirements established
1- 1 of 5 requirement established

5% 5- 100% of classrooms & facilities are structured & well-maintained


4- 80-99% of classrooms & facilities are structured & well-maintained
3- 60-79% of classrooms & facilities are structured & well-maintained
2- 40-59% of classrooms & facilities are structured & well-maintained
1- 39% & below of classrooms & facilities are structured & well-maintained

5% 5- Teachers are provided with the following technical assistance:


* LAC Sessions ( 4 hours per month)
* Post Conferences ( 10 per month)
* INSET ( 1 per school year)
* Meetings ( 10 per year)
* Mentoring/Peer Coaching (1 per month)
4- Teachers are provided with 4 out of 5 forms of technical assistance.
3- Teachers are provided with 3 out of 5 forms of technical assistance.
2- Teachers are provided with 2 out of 5 forms of technical assistance.
1- Teachers are provided with 1 out of 5 forms of technical assistance.

5- 100% of qualified tchrs. Assisted for ERF/ Step increment / Promotion


5% / Service credits
4- 80-99% of qualified tchrs. Assisted for ERF/ Step increment /
Promotion / Service credits
3- 60-79%of qualified tchrs. Assisted for ERF/ Step increment /
Promotion / Service credits
2- 40-59% of qualified tchrs. Assisted for ERF/ Step increment /
Promotion / Service credits
1- 39% & below of qualified tchrs. Assisted for ERF/ Step increment /
Promotion / Service credits

10% 5- 100% of teachers' portfolios collected and compiled.


5- 80-99% of teachers' portfolios collected and compiled.
5- 60-79% of teachers' portfolios collected and compiled.
5- 40-59% of teachers' portfolios collected and compiled.
5- 39% and below of teachers' portfolios collected and compiled.
2.5% Received support and partnership for school development on the following
*LGU/ SEF-supported projects and activities
*PTA projects and support
*School personnel projects
*Student organizations projects
*NGOs initiated projects
*Alumni projects and support
*NGAs projects and support
*Other community organizations/private individuals
5- 6 and above stakeholders support given to school projects/activities
4-5 stakeholders support given to school projects/activities
3- 4 stakeholders support given to school projects/activities
2- 3 stakeholders support given to school projects/activities
1- 1-2 stakeholders support given to school projects/activities
5 - 10 and above issues and accomplishments relative to school
2.5% performance disseminated and deliberated
4 - 8 to 9 issues and accomplishments relative to school performance
disseminated and deliberated
3 - 6 to 7 issues and accomplishments relative to school performance
disseminated and deliberated
2 - 4 to 5 issues and accomplishments relative to school performance
disseminated and deliberated
1 - 3 and below issues and accomplishments relative to school
performance disseminated and deliberated

8% 5-100% of plans,programs & projects based on data to improve

schools performance captured in SIP/AIP implemented with evidences

4-80%-99% of plans,programs & projects based on data to improve schools

performance captured in SIP/AIP implemented with evidences

3-60%-79% of plans,programs & projects based on data to improve schools


perforamce captured in SIP/AIP implemented with evidences
2-40%-59% of plans,programs & projects to improve school performance
captured in SIP/AIP implemented w/ evidences
1-39% & below of plans,programs & projects to improve school performance
captured in SIP/AIP implemented with evidences

9% *With clear financial management system for the school


supported by evidences such as liquidation reports, account
logs, database sytem
*Allocated/Prioritized funds for programs and school facilities'
improvement and maintenance

*Monitored accounts and reports utilization of school fund


*Coordinated and reported to stakeholders on resource mobilization
and utilization

*Ensured quality standards for facilities given to the school


*Maintained school BEIS and regularly submit BEIS reports to the
Division Office
5- All of the mechanisms are in place
4- 1 of the mechanism is missing
3- 2 of the mechanisms are missing
2- 3 of the mechanisms are missing
1- 4 & above of the mechanisms are missing
5- 100% of the target met per indicator
1.00% 4- 80-99% of the target met per indicator
1.00% 3- 60%-79% of the target met per indicator
1.00% 2- 40%-59% of the target met per indicator
1- 39% & below of the target met per indicator

5- 1 action research/ CI conducted w/ documentation on completion of


2.00% intervention.

4- 1 action research / CI submitted and approved by the dist. committee

3- 1 action research/ CI on development.

2- 1 action research conceptualized

1- No action research

5-Conducted 1 action research with reported results


3.00%
4-Conducted 1 action research with results but not reported

3-Conducted 1 action research with partial results

2-Conducted 1 action research without results

1-1 action research partially conducted

Rater: ________________________________________
ASDS

ESTRELITA A. PEA
School Principal I

NILDA R. DABAL
School Principal III
T & REVIEW FORM

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ACTUAL RESULTS


EFFICIENCY TIMELINESS Q E T
5- 100% & above of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers 5- Instructional assistance provided
were given appropriate & timely instructional assista once a month.
4- 80%-99% of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers were 4- Instructional assistance provided once in
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance two months
3- 60-79% of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers were 3- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once in a quarter
2- 40%-59 grade7 to grade 11 teachers were 2- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once in a semester
1- 39% & below of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers were1- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once a year
5- 100% & above of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers we5- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once a month.
4- 80%-99% of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers were 4- Instructional assistance once in
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance two months
3- 60-79% of grade 7 to grade 11 teachers were 3- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once in a quarter
2- 40%-59 grade7 to grade 11 teachers were 2- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once in a semester
1- 39% & below of grade 6 teachers 1- Instructional assistance provided
given appropriate & timely instructional assistance once a year
5- 10 & above classroom observations conducted
monthly 5 - submitted last week of the month

4- 8-9 classroom observations conducted monthly 4- submitted 1- 5 days of the ensuing month

3- 6-7 classroom observations conducted monthly 3-submitted 6-10 days of the ensuing month
2- submitted 11-15 days of the ensuing
2- 4-5 classroom observations conducted monthly month
1- submitted 16 days & beyond of the
1- 3 & below classroom observations conducted montensuing month

5- Curriculum intervention implemented 5-Curriculum intervention plans


based on apprroved budget. implemented based on timeline
4- Curriculum intervention implemented 4- Curriculum intervention plans
exceeded 5% of approved budget implemented1- 2 weeks late
3-Curriculum intervention implemented 3- Curriculum intervention plans
exceeded 10% of approved budget implemented 3-4 weeks late
2-Curriculum intervention implemented 2- Curriculum intervention plans
exceeded 15% of approved budget implemented 5-6 weeks late
1- Curriculum intervention implemented 1- Curriculum intervention plans
exceeded 20% of approved budget implemented 7-8 weeks late

1-39% & below of curriculum intervention plans


implemented

5 - Checked/monitored 100% of teachers' DLL/DLP w5- Checked DLL/DLP based on timeline


appropriate instructional materials every week 4- Checked DLL/DLP 1-2 days late
4 - Checked/monitored 80-99% of teachers' DLL/DLP3- Inspected DLL/DLP 3-4 days late
appropriate instructional materials 2- Inspected DLL/DLP 5-6 days late
3 - Checked/monitored 60-79% of teachers' DLL/DLP1- Inspected DLL/DLP 7 days and beyond late
appropriate instructional materials
2 - Checked/monitored 40-59% of teachers' DLL/DLP w/
appropriate instructional materials
1 - Checked/monitored 39% and below of teachers' DLL/DLP
w/ appropriate instructional materials
5-Assessment tools collected & checked 5
days before the test
4-Assessment tools collected & checked 4
days before the test
3-Assessment tools collected & checked 3
days before the test
2 Assessment tools collected & checked 2
ers, correct answers.) days before the test
1 Assessment tools collected and checked 1
day before the test

ocus group discussion,

5- 5 of instructional systems managed


during opening of classes
4- 4 of instructional systems managed
during opening of classes
3- 3 of instructional systems managed
during opening of classes
2- 2 of instructional systems managed
during opening of classes
1- 1 of instructional systems managed
during opening of classes
5- 5 of the established systems (CFSS, Child
Protection Policy, DRRM, Solid Waste Management,
GAD, Health and Sanitation) have clear structures
and processes
4- 4 of 5 established systems have clear structures
and processes
3- 3 of 5 established systems have clear structures
and processes
2- 2 of 5 established systems have clear structures
and processes
1- 1 of 5 established system have clear structures
processes
5-100% of classrooms & facilities are well-structured
and well-maintained throughout the school year
4- 80-99% of classrooms & facilities are well-structured
and well-maintained for 7-8 months of the school year
3- 60-79% of classrooms & facilities are well-structured
and well-maintained for 5-6 months of the school year
2- 40-59% of classrooms & facilities are well-structured
and well-maintained for 3-4 months of the school year
1- 39% & below of classrooms & facilities are well-structured
and well-maintained for 2 months & below of the school year
5- 5 forms of technical assistance
delivered as scheduled within the school
year
4- 4 forms of technical assistance
delivered as scheduled
3- 3 forms of technical assistance
delivered as scheduled
2- 2 forms of technical assistance
delivered as scheduled
1- 1 form of technical assistance
delivered as scheduled
5- ERF/ STEP INCREMENT/Promotion
submitted 1 week before due date

4- submitted on due date

3- submitted 1 week after due date

2- submitted 2 weeks after due date

1- submitted 3 weeks after due date

5- 100% of teachers' portfolios rated.


4- 80-99% of teachers' portfolios rated.
3- 60-79% of teachers' portfolios rated.
2- 40-59% of teachers' portfolios rated.
1- 39% & below of teachers' portfolios rated.
5- 5 & above school needs addressed
4- 4 of the school needs addressed
3- 3 of the school needs addressed
2- 2 of the school needs addressed
1- 1 of the school needs addressed
5- 6 & above GPTA/HRPTA meetings conducted

4- 5 GPTA/HRPTA meetings conducted

3- 4 GPTA/HRPTA meetings conducted

2- 3 GPTA/HRPTA meetings conducted

1- 1-2 GPTA/HRPTA meetings conducted


5- Alll prog. & proj implemented within the
time frame w/ reports submitted.
4 - All Prog & proj implemented 1 week
after the time frame.
3- All Prog. & proj implemented 2 weeks
mprove schools after the time frame.
2- All Prog & proj. implemented 3 weeks
after the time frame.
1- All Prog & prroj implemented 4 weeks
improve schools after the time frame.

hool performance

5- submitted Liquidation and other reports on or

before due date


4- submitted Liquidation and other reports one week
after due date
3- submits Liquidation and other reports two
weeks

after due date


2- submits Liquidation and other reports
three weeks after due date
1- submits more than three weeks after due
date
5- met the target per indicator based on the SIP target
4- 0.01- 1% below the SIP target
3-1.01%- 2% below the SIP target
2- 2.01-3%% below the SIP target
1- 3.01% & above the SIP target
5- Action Research submitted/Approved and
recommended by the Division Action Research
Team 2 weeks before implementation
4 -Action Research submitted/Approved and
recommended by the Division Action Research
Team 1 week before implementation
3 -Action Research submitted/Approved and
recommended by the Division Action Research
Team 4-5 days before implementation
2- Action Research submitted/Approved and
recommended by the Division Action Research
Team 2-3 days before implementation
1 - Action Research submitted/Approved and
recommended by the Division Action Research
Team 1 day before implementation

5-Action Research conducted based on the timeline


4-Action Research conducted 1-2 days after the
timeline
3-Action Research conducted 3-4 days after the
timeline
2-Action Research conducted 5-6 days after the
timeline
1-Action Research conducted 1 week or more after
the timeline

MA. JUDELYN J. RAMOS ROSALIE M. GONZ


School Principal I School Principa

ALBERTO T. ALAV
I School Principa
CTUAL RESULTS RATING SCORE
Ave
ROSALIE M. GONZALES
School Principal I

ALBERTO T. ALAVARIN
School Principal III