1. 1 Performance Planning and Commitment Performance Monitoring and Coaching Performance Review and Evaluation

2. 2

6. ConsolidateConsolidate ReviewReview ValidateValidate EvaluateEvaluate

7. Determines Final Rating CalibratesRecommends Results of the Assessment OPCR

22. 22

24. Sample SPMS RATING SCALE for Efficiency N umerical AdjectivalDescription 5Outstanding 130% & above of the targeted quantity acted 4 Very Satisfactory 115% to 129.99% of the targeted quantity acted 3Satisfactory 100% to 114.99% of the targeted quantity acted 2Unsatisfactory 51% to 99.99% of the targeted quantity acted 1Poor 50% & Below of the targeted quantity acted

25. Sample SPMS RATING SCALE for Timeliness NumericalAdjectivalDescription 5Outstanding Task completed ahead of the planned time by 30% 4 Very Satisfactory Task completed ahead of the planned time by 15% to 29.99% 3Satisfactory Task completed on deadline or planned time or earlier but not more than 14.99% of the planned time. 2Unsatisfactory Task completed after the deadline or planned time by 51% to 99.99% 1Poor Task not completed fater the deadline or planned time by 50.99% or more

26. How to compute the final rating of the office/individual performances? Example: If the agency adopts the following weight allocation:  Strategic Priorities – 45%  Core Functions – 45%  Support Functions – 10%

27. Sample Computation 45% Strategic Priorities (Roadmap & PGS), 45% Core Functions, and 10% Support Functions CategoryMFORating SP4 1+1+1+2 = 5/4 = 1.25 x 45% =.56 Core Function 2 1 + 3 = 4/2 = 2 x 45% =.9 Support Function 1 4 x 10% =.4 Total/Final Overall Rating.56 +.9 +.4 = 1.86 Final Average Rating N/A Adjectival Rating Unsatisfactory

28. 28 Performance Rewarding and Development Planning Performance Planning and Commitment Performance Monitoring and Coaching Performance Review and Evaluation

29. 29

38. 38

39. 39

40. 40

41. 41

42. 42

43. 43

44. 44

45. 45

46. 46

47. 47

48. 48

49. 49

50. 50

51. 51

52. 52