Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court of the Philippines

Manila

G UIDELI NES FO R TH E
IM PL EM EN TATIO N
OF A
STR AT EG IC PE RFO RM AN CE
M AN AG EM EN T SYST EM ( SPM S)
IN TH E JU DICIA RY

Pursuant to Civil Service Commission (CSC) Memorandum Circular

No. 6, Series of 20121, and in line with Civil Service Commission (CSC)
Memorandum Circular No. 13, Series of 19992, Civil Service Commission
(CSC) Memorandum Circular No. 1, Series of 2009 3 and Administrative
Matter No 03-06-13-SC4, the following rules and guidelines are hereby
prescribed to implement the Supreme Court Strategic Performance
Management System (SPMS), as follows:

I
TITLE

Section 1. This shall be known and cited as the "Guidelines on the

Implementation of Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) in
the Judiciary.

Guidelines in the Establishment and Implementation of Agency Strategic Performance

Management.
2

Adopting the Revised Policies on the Performance Evaluation System CSC MC No. 07-2007.
3

Reiterating the Installation of a Performance Management System.

4

Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.

1
 II
DECLARATION OF POLICY

Section 1. The Judiciary shall be united and driven towards a common

vision of our desired future as an institution – a vision that is possible, to
which all our individual and collective work will be aligned, and which will
provide the overarching direction and focus on our operations and the
institutional leadership that the Judiciary will exercise.

Section 2. The CSC mandates that all agencies should have a CSC
approved Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS), wherein all
performance-based human resources movements, and/or
developments/interventions such as promotion, scholarship, training,
rewards and incentives shall be based.

Section 3. The Judiciary shall be independent, effective, efficient and

worthy of public trust and confidence.

Section 4. Investment in our people, not just for those performing

adjudicative functions but also for those providing support services is
necessary to enable the Judiciary and its personnel to grow and give
satisfaction to the public that they serve.

III
RATIONALE

Section 1. The SPMS is a concept that links employees' performance

with the agency vision, mission and strategic goals.

Section 2. The system ensures organizational effectiveness and

improvement of individual employee efficiency by cascading organizational
accountabilities to the various levels of the organization anchored on the
establishment of rational and factual basis for performance targets and
measures.

Section 3. SPMS will link performance management with other HR

systems and ensure adherence to the principle of results-based/performance-
based tenure and incentive scheme.

2
 IV
BASIC ELEMENTS

Section 1. The basic elements of the SPMS are as follows:

A. Goal aligned to agency mandate and organizational
priorities. Performance goals and measurements of the
Judiciary are aligned to national development plans,
mandate under the Constitution, vision, mission, and
strategic priorities, and/or organizational performance
indicator framework. Predetermined standards are
integrated into the success indicators as organizational
objectives are cascaded down to the operational level.

B. Outputs/outcomes-based. The system puts premium on

the major final outputs (MFOs) that contribute to the
realization of the organization's mandate, vision, mission,
strategic priorities, outputs, and outcomes.

C. Team approach to performance management.

Accountability and individual roles in the achievement of
organizational goals are clearly defined to facilitate
collective goal setting and performance rating. The
individual's work plan or commitment and rating form is
linked to the division, unit, and office work plan or
commitment and rating form to clearly establish the
connection between organizational and employee
performance.

D. User-friendly. The forms to be used for organizational

and individual commitments and performance shall be
similar and easy to complete. The office; division, and
individual major final outputs and success indicators are
aligned to facilitate cascading organizational goals to
individual employees and harmonization of
organizational and staff performance ratings.

E. Information system that supports monitoring and

evaluation. A monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and
information systems that facilitate the linkage between
organizational and employee performance and generate

3
 timely, accurate, and reliable information that can be used
to track performance, report accomplishments, improve
programs, and be the basis for policy decision-making
shall be established. Mechanics and features of this
information system shall be discussed with appropriate
officials and personnel of the SC, CA, SB, CTA and the
lower courts through the Office of the Court
Administrator.

Section 2. Communication Plan. An orientation program for Judiciary

officials and employees on the new policies on SPMS shall be implemented.
This is to promote awareness and interest on the system and generate
appreciation for the Judiciary SPMS as a management tool to engage
officials and employees as partners in the achievement of organizational
goals.

V
SCOPE AND COVERAGE

Section 1. The SPMS shall apply to all officials and employees of the
Judiciary, except Justices of the SC, CA, SB and CTA; the PHILJA
Chancellor; JBC Members; Judges and part-time employees.

VI
KEY PLAYERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Section 1. SPMS CHAMPION (HEAD OF AGENCY) –

CHIEF JUSTICE

1.1. Primarily responsible and accountable for the

establishment and implementation of the SPMS.

1.2. Sets the Judiciary’s performance goals/objectives and

performance measures

1.3. Determines the Judiciary’s target setting period.

1.4. Approves office performance commitments and ratings

1.5. Assesses performance of offices.

4
Section 2. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT TEAMS

2.1. The Performance Management Teams (PMTs) shall have

the following responsibilities:
a) Set consultation meetings with all Heads of
Offices/Divisions to discuss the office performance
commitment and rating system and tools;

b) Ensure that office performance management

targets, measures, and budget are aligned with the
goals of the agency;

c) Recommend approval of the office performance

and rating system and tools;

d) Act as appeals body and final arbiter;

e) Identify potential top performers for awards; and

f) Adopt internal rules, procedures, and strategies to

carry out its responsibilities.

2.2. Supreme Court Performance Management Team (SC-

PMT) shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson Chief Justice or designated

representative, Office of the Chief
Justice

Vice-Chairperson Clerk of Court/Deputy Clerk of Court

Members Chief/Assistant Chief, Office of

Administrative Services (OAS-SC)
Chief/Assistant Chief, Office of
Administrative Services, (OAS-OCA)
Representative, Supreme Court
Assembly of Lawyer Employees
(SCALE)
Representative, Second Level
Employees, Supreme Court
Employees Association (SCEA)
Representative, First Level

5
 Employees, Supreme Court
Employees Association (SCEA)

2.3. Court of Appeals Performance Management Team (CA-

PMT) shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson Presiding Justice or designated

Representative

Vice-Chairperson Executive Clerk of Court IV

Members Chief Judicial Staff Officer of

Personnel Division
Chief Judicial Staff Officer of
Finance
Planning Officer
Chief Judicial Staff Officer of any
designated office
ACAE Representative

2.4 The Sandiganbayan Performance Management Team

(SB-PMT) shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson Presiding Justice or Authorized

Representative

Vice-Chairperson Executive Clerk of Court IV

Members
Chief Legal Office
Chief JSO Admin. Division
Chief JSO Finance Division
SBEA Representative

2.5 The Court of Tax Appeals Performance Management

Team (CTA-PMT) shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson Presiding Justice or Designated

Representative

Vice-Chairperson Clerk of Court (Executive Clerk of

Court IV)

6
 Members Chief of Office, Office of Legal and
Technical Services
Chief of Office, Office of
Administrative and Finance Services
Representative, Employees
Association

2.6. The Performance Management Teams for Lower Courts

(PMT-LC) shall be composed of the following:

Chairperson Court Administrator

Vice- Deputy Court Administrators (in

Chairperson charge of the regions)

Members Chief / Asst. Chief, OAS, OCA

Chief / Asst. Chief RTC Personnel
Division
Chief / Asst. Chief MTC etc.
Personnel Division
Representative 1st Level Employee
(PACE)
Representative 2nd Level Employee
(PACE)

2.7. Each office in the Supreme Court, Court of

Appeals,Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals shall
create its own Office Performance Management Team
(OPMT) with the following composition:

Chairperson Chief of Office

Vice-Chairperson Assistant Chief of Office

Members Division Chiefs

Section 3. PLANNING OFFICE

3.1. Act as the PMT Secretariat;

7
 3.2. Schedule the review and evaluation of the Office
Performance Commitment and Rating (OPCR) Form by
the PMT ;

3.3 Consolidate, review, validate and evaluate the initial

performance assessment based on accomplishments
reported against success indicators and budget against
actual expenses;

3.4. Conduct an annual agency performance planning and

review conference; and;

3.5 Provide each office with the final office assessment as

basis in the assessment of individual employees.

Section 4. OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVCES

(OAS)

4.1. Monitor submission of Individual Performance

Commitment and Rating (IPCR) Form;

4.2. Review the summary list of individual performance

rating;

4.3. Provide analytical data on retention, skill/competency

gaps and talent development plan;

4.4 Coordinate developmental interventions that will form

part of the HR Plan.

Section 5. CHIEF OF OFFICE

5.1 Assume primary responsibility for performance

management in his/her office;
5.2. Conducts strategic planning session with supervisors and
staff;

5.3. Review and approve individual performance commitment

and rating form;

5.4. Submit quarterly accomplishment report;

5.5 Conduct initial assessment of office's performance;

8
 5.6. Determine final assessment of individual employees'
performance level;

5.7. Inform employees of the final rating and identify

necessary interventions to employees; and

5.8 Provide written notice to subordinates who obtain

Unsatisfactory or Poor rating.

Section 6. DIVISION/SECTION CHIEF

6.1 Assume joint responsibility with the Head of Office in

attaining performance targets;

6.2. Rationalize distribution of targets and tasks;

6.3. Monitor closely the status of performance of

subordinates;

6.4. Assess individual employees' performance; and

6.5. Recommend developmental interventions.

Section 7. INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES

7.1. Act as partners of management and co-employees in

meeting organizational performance goals.

7.2. Prepares an Individual Performance Commitment and

Review (IPCR) and Monitoring Report Form to be given
to his immediate supervisor.

7.3. Documents at least quarterly mentoring and coaching

discussions with his immediate supervisor using the
Individual Performance Monitoring and Coaching
Journal.

VII
SPMS FOUR-STAGE CYCLE AND CALENDAR

9
Section 1. P ERFORMANCE P LANNING AND C OMMITMENT
The Judiciary shall conduct an annual Planning,
Programming and Budgeting Workshop. Thereafter, all
Chiefs of Offices shall meet with the Division/Section
Chiefs and employees and agree on the outputs that
should be accomplished based on the goals and objectives
set for the Judiciary.
The suggested time for Performance Planning and
Commitment is the last quarter of the preceding year.
During this stage, success indicators are determined.
Success indicators are performance level yardsticks
consisting of performance measures and performance
targets. This shall serve as bases in the office and
individual employee's preparation of their performance
contract and rating form.
Performance measures shall include any one,
combination of, or all of the following general categories:

Category Definition
Effectiveness/Quality The extent to which actual
performance compares with
targeted performance. The degree
to which objectives are achieved
and the extent to which targeted
problems are solved. In
management, effectiveness relates
to getting the right things done.
Efficiency The extent to which time or
resources is/are used for the
intended task or purpose.
Measures whether targets are
accomplished with a minimum
amount or quantity of waste,
expense or unnecessary effort.
Timeliness Measures whether the deliverable
was done on time based on the
requirements of the law and/or
clients/stakeholders.
Time-related performance
indicators evaluate such things as
project completion deadlines, time

10
 management skills and other time
sensitive expectations.
Competency A “cluster of related Knowledge,
skills and attitudes that affect a
major part of one’s job (a role or
responsibility), that correlates with
performance on the job, and can be
measured against well accepted
standards, and that can be
improved through training and
development.”

The Judiciary Development Plan, Annual Budget Plans and

Programs etc., shall be the basis of the targets of the Offices.
Aside from the Office commitments explicitly identified
under the Judiciary Development Plan, MFOs that contribute
to the attainment of the organizational mission/vision which
form part of the core functions of the Judiciary and its offices
shall be indicated as performance targets.
The targets shall take into account any combination of, or all
of the following:

 Historical data. The data shall consider past

performance

 Benchmarking. This involves identifying and

comparing the best agencies or institutions or units
within the agency with similar functions or
processes. Benchmarking may also involve
recognizing existing standards based on provisions
or requirements of the law.

 Client demand. This involves a bottom-up approach

where the Judiciary sets targets based on the needs
of its clients. It may consult with stakeholders and
review the feedback on its services.

 OPES Reference Table. List of major final outputs

with definition and corresponding OPES points.

 Top Management instruction. The Chief Justice

may set targets and give special assignments.

11
  Future trend. Targets may be based from results of
the comparative analysis of the actual performance
of courts at each level with their potential
performance.

In setting work targets, each Office shall indicate the detailed

budget requirements per expense account to help in ensuring
a strategy driven budget allocation and in measuring cost
efficiency. These targets, performance measures, budget and
responsibility centers are summarized in the Office
Performance Commitment and Review (OPCR) Form5.
The approved Office Performance Commitment and Review
Form shall serve as basis for individual performance targets
and measures to be prepared in the Division Performance
Commitment and Review (DPCR) Form6 and Individual
Employee's Performance Commitment and Review (IPCR)
Form7.
The Offices shall also identify specific
division/unit/group/individuals as primarily accountable for
producing a particular target output per
program/project/activity. These targets, performance
measures, budget and responsibility centers shall be
summarized in the OPCR. The OPCR must be approved by
the Chief Justice on the 15th of June and December preceding
the start of a new semester.
The approved OPCR shall serve as basis for individual
performance targets and measures to be prepared in the
IPCR.
Unless the work output of a particular duty has been assigned
pre-set standards by management, its standards shall be
agreed upon by the supervisors and the ratees. Individual
employee's performance standards shall not be lower than the
agency's standards in its approved OPCR Form.

SECTION 2. PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND COACHING

This will be done regularly during the performance period by
the Planning Office, Chiefs of Office, Division and Office
5

Annex “A”. Office Performance Commitment and Review (OPCR) Form

6

Annex “B”. Division Performance Commitment and Review (DPCR) Form

7

Annex “C”. Individual Performance Commitment and Review (IPCR) Form

12
 Heads, and the individual. The focus is creating an enabling
environment to improve team performance and develop
individual potentials.
Supervisors and coaches play a critical role at this stage. Their
focus is on the critical function of managers and supervisors as
coaches and mentors in order to provide an enabling
environment/intervention to improve team performance; and
manage and develop individual potentials.
Each office will submit a quarterly accomplishment report
which is also the Office Performance Commitment and Review
(OPCR) and Monitoring Report Form to be submitted on the 1 st
Monday of the succeeding quarter to the Planning Office.
Each individual will submit a quarterly accomplishment report
which is also the Individual Performance Commitment and
Review (IPCR) and Monitoring Report Form to be submitted on
the 1st Monday of the succeeding quarter to the Division Chief
with a copy to the Office of Administrative Services.
Department and/or Individual Performance Mentoring and
Coaching Journals must also be completed every quarter.

SECTION 3. PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EVALUATION

The performance review and evaluation will be done at
regular intervals to assess both the performance of the individual
and his/her office. The suggested time periods for Performance
Review and Evaluation are the first week of July and the first
week of January the following year.
a. Office Performance Assessment
i. The Planning Office or any responsible unit in the agency
shall consolidate, review, validate and evaluate the initial
performance assessment of each Offices based on the
reported Office accomplishments against the success
indicators, and the allotted budget against actual expenses.
The result of the assessment shall be submitted to the PMT
for calibration and recommendation to the Chief Justice or its
representative who shall determine the final rating of
offices/units.

ii. A review conference shall be conducted annually by the

Planning Office for the purpose of discussing the Office
assessment with concerned Chiefs of Offices. This shall

13
 include participation of the Financial Management and
Budget Office as regards budget utilization.

iii. Any issue/appeal/protest on the Office assessment shall be

articulated by the concerned head of office and decided by
the Chief Justice or its representative during this conference.

iv. The final rating shall no longer be appealable/contestable

after the conference.

v. The Planning Office shall provide each Office with the

final Office Assessment to serve as basis in the assessment of
individual staff members.

vi. After the Planning Office sends the final Office

Assessment, the Chief of Office and his/her Division Chiefs
shall discuss office direction and development plan.
b. Performance Assessment for Individuals
i. The immediate supervisor shall assess individual employee
performance based on the commitments made at the
beginning of the rating period. The performance rating shall
be based solely on records of accomplishment; there is no
need for self-rating.

ii. The supervisor shall indicate qualitative comments,

observations and recommendations in the individual
employee's performance commitment and review form to
include competency assessment and critical incidents which
shall be used for human resource development purposes such
as promotion and other interventions.

iii. Employee's assessment shall be discussed by the

supervisor with the concerned ratee prior to the submission of
the Individual employee's performance commitment and
review form to the Head of Office.

iv. The Chief of Office shall determine the final assessment of

performance level of the individual employee in his/her
Office based on proof of performance. The final assessment

14
 shall correspond to the adjectival description of Outstanding,
Very Satisfactory, Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Poor.

v. The Chief of Office may adopt appropriate mechanism to

assist him/her distinguish performance level of individuals,
such as but not limited to peer ranking and client feedback.

vi. The employee and his immediate supervisor must

accomplish a Professional Development Plan8 (agree on
Strengths of Employee, Development Areas of Employee and
Plans of Action). This is mandatory for employees who were
rated Unsatisfactory and Poor in the preceding rating period
and for employees who exhibit Unsatisfactory or Poor
performance during the rating period.

vii. The Chief of Office and the immediate supervisor shall

also accomplish the Competency Evaluation Form9

The Chief of Office shall ensure that the employee is

viii.
notified of his/her final performance assessment and the
Summary List of Individual Ratings10 with the attached
IPCRs are submitted to the Office of Administrative Services
within the prescribed period.

SECTION 4. PERFORMANCE REWARDING AND DEVELOPMENT

PLANNING
a. Part of the individual employee’s evaluation is the
competency assessment vis-à-vis the competency requirements
of the job. The result of the assessment shall be discussed by the
Chief of Office and immediate supervisors with the individual
employee at the end of each rating period. The discussion shall
focus on the strengths, competency-related performance gaps
and the opportunities to address these gaps, career paths and
alternatives.
8

Annex ”D” Professional Development Plan

9

“Annex E” Competency Evaluation Form

10

“Annex F” Summary List of Individual Ratings

15
 b. Appropriate development interventions based on the
competency assessment shall be made available by the Chief of
Office and immediate supervisor/s in coordination with the
Office of Administrative Services/Personnel Office.

c. The result of the competency assessment shall be treated

independently of the performance rating of the employee.

d. The Professional Development Plan to improve or correct

performance of employees with Unsatisfactory and Poor
performance ratings must be outlined, including timelines, and
monitored to measure progress.

e. Based on the results of the performance review and

evaluation, developmental interventions shall be made available
to specific employees when appropriate.

f. The results of performance evaluation/assessment shall serve

as inputs to the:
 Heads of Offices in identifying and providing the
kinds of interventions needed, based on the
developmental needs identified;
 Office of Administrative Services/Personnel Office in
consolidating and coordinating developmental
interventions that will form part of the HR Plan and
the basis for rewards and incentives;
 PMT in identifying potential PRAISE Awards
nominees for various awards categories; and
 PRAISE Committee in determining- top performers
of the Agency who qualify for awards and incentives.

Section 5. The SPMS Calendar shall reflect the four-stage cycle with
activities, unit/person responsible and time-frame for each phase.

16
 VIII
MECHANICS OF PERFORMANCE RATING

Section 1. Rating Period

The performance of an employee shall be monitored over a six-month

performance rating period, viz, from January to June and from July to
December.

Section 2. SPMS RATING SCALE

Numerical Adjectival Rating

Rating

5 Outstanding

4 Very Satisfactory

3 Satisfactory

2 Unsatisfactory

1 Poor

Section 3. COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT RATING

360 Degree – Peer Evaluation Form

Name
Supervisor Name (3 - Way Management)
Job Title
Division

Definition of Ratings

PARTICULARS RATING

17
 Exceptional – Consistently exceeds all relevant performance
standards. Provides leadership, foster teamwork, is highly
productive, innovative, responsiveness and generates top quality 5
work. Active in office – related professional and or/community
groups.
Exceeds Expectations – Consistently meets and often exceeds
all relevant performance standards. Shows initiative and
4
versatility, works collaboratively, has strong technical &
interpersonal skills or has achieved significant improvement in
these areas.
Meets Expectations – Meets all relevant performance
standards. Seldom exceeds or falls short of desired results or
3
objectives. Lacks appropriate level of skills or is
inexperienced / still learning the scope of the job
Below Expectations – Sometimes meets the performance
standards. Seldom exceeds and often falls short of desired
results. Performance has declined significantly, or employee 2
has not sustained adequate improvement, as required since the
last performance review or performance improvement plan
Needs Improvement – Consistently falls short of performance
1
standards

INSTRUCTIONS

Describe the employee’s contributions in each of the functional competency.

It is very important that you demonstrate precise, detailed example since the
last performance evaluation. Ratings must support and be substantiated by
narrative comments.

(Insert Functional Competency here)

RATING 5 4 3 2 1 N/A
(Insert definition of Functional Competency
here)

18
 Comments:

Supplementary Feedback

In what field do you endorse this employee concentrate for development?

Suggested training program/s as intervention for employee advancement.

Section 4. Judiciary’s goals, priorities, success indicators and Major

Final Outputs (MFO) are in accord with Civil Service Commission
standards. Each MFO is based on the dimensions of performance or
accomplishments, namely: quality, efficiency and timeliness.
Section 5. Quality or Effectiveness means getting the right things
done. It refers to the degree to which objectives are achieved as intended and
the extent to which issues are addressed with a certain degree of excellence.
2.1. Quality or effective performance involves the following elements:
a) Acceptability;

b) Meeting Standards;

c) Client satisfaction with services rendered;

d) Accuracy;

e) Meeting Standards; and

f) Completeness or comprehensiveness of reports;

g) Creativity or innovation; and

h) Personal initiative.

Section 6. Efficiency is the extent to which targets are accomplished

using the minimum amount of time or resources.
Efficient performance applies to continuing tasks or frontline services
(e.g., issuance of visas, licenses, permits, clearances and certificates). It
involves the following elements:
a) Standard response time;

b) Number of requests/applications acted upon over

number of requests/applications received; and

19
 c) Optimum use of resources (e.g., money, logistics
and office supplies).

Section 7. Timeliness measures if the targeted deliverable was done

within the scheduled or expected time-frame. Timely performance involves
meeting deadlines as set in the work plan.

Section 8. Standard of Performance Measures

a. QUANTITY/EFFICIENCY

FIXED TARGET PLANNED TARGET

Performance exceeding targets by 30% and
100% or more of target
above of the planned targets; from the previous
5 completed with optimum use
definition of performance exceeding targets by
of prescribed resources
at least 50%.
90-99.9% of target completed Performance exceeding targets by 15% to 29%
4 with optimum use of of the planned targets; from the previous range
prescribed resources of performance.
75-89% of target completed
Performance of 100% to 114% of the planned
3 with optimum use of
targets.
prescribed resources
61-74.9% of target completed
Performance of 51% to 99% of the planned
2 with above 10% use of
targets
prescribed resources
60% and below of target
Performance failing to meet the planned targets
1 completed with 20% above
by 50% or below.
use of prescribed resources

b. QUALITY/EFFECTIVENESS OF WORK

Accurately, clearly presented and well organized

5 output, with satisfaction from client of the
services rendered. All aspects of work
assignment covered
Output delivered in accordance with prescribed
guidelines; clearly presented and organized; with
4
client satisfaction; one (1) or two (2) errors but
results still very good
Output delivered within prescribed guidelines,
3 with more than one (1) or two (2) minor errors
or deficiencies; requires minor/partial revisions
Output delivered with one (1) or two (2) major
2
errors or deficiencies; requires major revisions

20
 Output not acceptable; haphazardly done and /or
1 careless in the execution/ implementation of
work; needs total revision
c. TIMELINESS

Output delivered 20% ahead of prescribed

5
time of completion
Output delivered 10% ahead of prescribed
4
time of completion
Output delivered in prescribed time of
3
completion
Output delivered 10% after the prescribed
2 time of completion

Output delivered 20% after the prescribed

1
time of completion

Section 9. Each Success Indicator has the following features of S¬M-

A-R-T: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-Bound.

Section 10. Competency Measurements11.

Section 11. Employees' rating shall be based on pre-determined targets

based on duties and responsibilities as contained in their duly approved
Office Performance Commitment and Review and Individual Performance
Commitment and Review.

Section 12. The management principles stated under this Rule shall
also apply in the performance rating of operating units.

Section 13. The performance rate as to quality, efficiency and

timeliness is measured using a numerical scale ranging from 1 to 5 — with 1
as the lowest and 5 as the highest. The table below explains the meaning of
each rating:

Section 14. For the rating to be objective, impartial, and verifiable, the
operational definition or meaning of each numerical rating under each

11

“Annex G” Competency Measurements

21
relevant dimension (i.e., quality, efficiency, or timeliness) per performance
target or success indicator must be indicated.

Section 15. The average of all individual performance assessments

shall not go higher than the collective performance assessment of the
Office.

IX
SANCTIONS

Section 1. Unless justified, the non-submission of the Office Performance

Commitment and Review (OPCR) Form to the Performance Management
Team (PMT), and the Individual Performance Commitment and Review
(IPCR) Form to the Office of Administrative Services/Personnel Office
within the specified period shall be a ground for:
1.1. Employee's disqualification from performance-based personnel
actions which would require the rating for the given period
such as promotion, training or scholarship grants and
performance enhancement bonus, if the failure of the
submission of the report form is the fault of the employees.;
and
1.2. Administrative sanction for violation of reasonable office rules
and regulations such as simple neglect of duty of supervisors or
employee's responsible for the delay or non-submission of such
forms.

Section 2. The failure on the part of the Head of Office to comply with
the required notices to their subordinates for their unsatisfactory or poor
performance during a rating period shall be a ground for an administrative
offense for neglect of duty.

X
APPEAL

Section 1. The Office Performance Assessment as discussed in the

performance review conference shall be final and not appealable. Any issue
on the initial performance assessment of an Office shall be discussed and
decided during the performance review conference.

Section 2. Individual employees who feel aggrieved or dissatisfied

with their performance rating may file an appeal with the Performance

22
Management Team within 15 days from receipt of the notice of their final
performance evaluation from the Head of Office.

Section 3. The Performance Management Team shall decide on the

appeal within one month from receipt thereof.

Section 4. The decision of the PMT is merely recommendatory. The

Chief Justice shall make the final decision. The final decision can be
appealed to the Supreme Court as part of the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedy and due process.

Section 5. Officials or employees who are separated from the service

on the basis of Unsatisfactory or Poor Performance rating can appeal to the
Civil Service Commission or its Regional Office within 15 days from receipt
of the order or notice of separation.

Section 6. Employees are not allowed to protest the performance

ratings of their fellow employees.

XI
EFFECTIVITY

Section 1. These guidelines shall take effect and implemented

immediately upon the approval of the Supreme Court En Banc.

MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO

CHIEF JUSTICE

23