Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pcoper Manual PDF
Pcoper Manual PDF
Pcoper Manual PDF
PNPM-DPL-DS-5-1-03
Foreword iii
Preface Iv
CHAPTER INTRODUCTION
I:
1.1 Background 1
1.2 General Policy 1
1.3 Purpose 2
1.4 Scope 2
References
Republic of the Philippines
Department of the Interior and Local Government
National Police Commission
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
Office of the Chief, PNP
FOREWORD
An essential element of “O.N.E.” Philippine National Police is its human
resource. For the PNP to become an efficient and effective organization, it must consist of
personnel that “talk less” and deliver more.
PREFACE
It has been a formidable challenge for the personnel of the Directorate for
Plans to come up and flesh out the details in this Police Commissioned Officer Performance
Evaluation Rating (PCOPER) System Manual. Consistent with the C, PNP’s O.N.E.
PNP Action Plan, the System is a major refinement of the old individual performance
evaluation system.
As differentiated from the old system, the PCOPER system covers the
totality of the true nature of police service as performed/delivered by a Police Commissioned
Officer. The performance of the PCO in the new system will be measured in terms of these
dimensions: Output; Core Competencies on job knowledge, supervisory control, people
management, and organizational responsiveness; and Personal Qualities. Each dimension
is divided into several performance indicators that would help pinpoint the strong or weak
areas that a PCO needs to enhance or improve on. His/Her rating becomes a basis for
his/her assignment, retention or relief, promotion, and attrition from the service.
With the PCOPER System, it is hoped that the PNP will be able to
truly recognize and reward those who perform well and get rid of the “A-B-K-D Pulis”, in
particular and insulate the organization from external interference, in general.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.1.2 In line with this provision, the National Police Commission issued
Memorandum Circular No. 92-012, entitled “PNP Performance Evaluation System
(PNPPES),” otherwise known as individual performance evaluation system on
November 13, 1992 to implement an evaluation system for the improvement of
individual efficiency, discipline and organizational effectiveness. On Sept. 23,
1993, NAPOLCOM issued Memorandum Circular No. 93-019 amending
Memorandum Circular No. 92-012, prescribing the use of five-point rating scale in
compliance to the Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 12, series of
1993.
The PCOPER System shall be made an integral part of the Human Resource
Development Program of the PNP. It is designed to suit its unique functions of
quantifying performance given the nature of police work and the frequency of
rotation in job assignments. It shall be in accordance with the following policies:
a. The PCO shall be apprised of what are expected of him as well as his rights
under the System and shall be kept informed of how well he is performing;
1.3 Purpose
Consistent with the general policy, the aim of this PCOPER System is to
attain the following objectives:
a. To foster the improvement of individual efficiency, work ethics and
behavioral discipline of the PCOs;
1.4. Scope
The Police Commissioned Officer Performance Evaluation Rating
(PCOPER) System shall apply to all PCOs of the PNP. It shall be used to assess
the performance of a PCO in terms of his contribution to the attainment of the PNP
Mission and Vision, his skills and competencies and attitude towards work. The
PCOPER shall be a requirement and parameter for promotion, assignment/
designation and attrition from the service.
CHAPTER 2
2.1.3 Rating of the individual performance shall be undertaken every six (6)
months. Evaluation report covering the period January to June shall be submitted
within the first twenty (20) working days of July, while for the period July to
December shall be submitted within the first twenty (20) working days of January of
the succeeding year.
2.2.5 Very Poor (VP) – Did not achieve minimum expectations and needs
major improvement. Demonstrated very little or no competence at all.
2.3.1 PART I. OUTPUT – this includes the quantity, quality, and timeliness of
work done vis-à-vis the required target output.
a. Job Knowledge
b. Supervisory Control
c. People Management
d. Organizational Responsiveness
b. PCOs who are on official study leave shall not be rated during his leave of
absence. However, he/she must secure his/her rating prior to leave. On the other
hand, PCOs on service schooling must submit, together with his/her academic
grades in school, his last performance evaluation rating to the new unit/office upon
completion of schooling or training.
d. PCOs who are on non-duty status; meaning those who do not hold any
duty designation or position during the rating period shall not be rated. Failure to
acquire rating for four (4) consecutive rating periods or a rating of Poor (PR) or
Very Poor (VR) for six cumulative ratings shall be a ground for attrition.
2.5 Completion and Submission of PCOPER Report
The PCO performance evaluation rating report shall be accomplished by the
rater in three (3) to five (5) copies, depending on the assignment of the ratee. The
PCOs concerned shall observe the flow of submission of the PCOPER Report as
illustrated in Figure 1.
PPO/CPO/
RMG D- NATI
Admin PCO
Staff ONA
RAT L
EE SUPP
MPS/CPS/
PMG
ORT
NSUs
(Regional/
Admin PCO
UNIT
Provincial/
City)
Admin PCO
Admin PCO
MPS/CPS/
PMG
RATEE
RATER REVIEWER
TCDS TDCO
D-STAFF TCDS
DEP D-STAFF
EX-O DEP
DIVISION EX-O
CHIEFS
*PC
Os in
the
*See paragraph no. 3.3 of this
Chapter.
Divis
Figure 2. Rater/Reviewer Designation in the D-Staff
ion
3.2.2 Regional Offices/Units
PCOs in the Police Stations shall be rated by their respective Deputy Chief
of Police with their Chief of Police as reviewer. The Deputy Chief of Police shall
be rated by their Chief of Police with their Deputy Provincial Director/City Director
as reviewer. The Chiefs of Police and PCOs in the Provincial HQs /City Police
Office/RMG shall be rated by their Deputy Provincial/City/RMG Director with their
Provincial/City/RMG Director as reviewer. The Deputy Provincial/City/RMG
Director shall be rated by their Provincial/City/RMG Director with their
CRDS as reviewer. The Provincial/City/RMG Director and the Regional Staff
shall be rated by their CRDS with their DRDO as reviewer. All other PCOs in the
Regional Headquarters shall be rated by their respective Regional Staff Officer
with their CRDS as reviewer. CRDS shall be rated by the DRDO with the DRDA
as reviewer. DRDO shall be rated by the DRDA with the RD as reviewer. DRDA
shall be rated by the RD with TCDS as reviewer. The RD shall be rated by
TCDS with TDCO as reviewer.
RATER REVIEWER
TCDS TDCO
RD TCDS
DRDA RD
DRDO DRDA
CRDS D RD
PD RCDS
R-STAFF
RHQ DEP PD PD
*PCOs
COP DEP PD
PPO -STAFF
PPO HQ
*PCOs
PS
*PCOs
Rater Reviewer
D-Staff
Supervisor TCDS
NSU D-Staff
DIRECTOR Supervisor
DEP DIRECTOR
CDS DEP
RO
CDS
NSU STAFF
NSUHQ PO RO
Officers
*Line PCOs
4.1.2 The PES shall also initiate in providing copies of the PCOPER Report,
particularly those who are due for promotion, assignment/designation and attrition
from the service, to the Placement and Promotion Board and Attrition Board.
ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS
6.1.1 Failure of the rater, ratee, reviewer and Admin PCO to accomplish, sign
and transmit the PCOPER within the period required from each one of them
resulting in its non-submission to PES, PPD, ODPRM within twenty (20) workings
days after the rating period is a ground for an administrative case for simple neglect
of duty, and if found guilty, shall be a cause for :
This Police Officer Performance Evaluation Rating form has three (3) major
parts, namely: Part I. Output; Part II. Core Competencies; and Part III.
Personal Qualities. Parts I and II are divided into dimensions and indicators. Part III
is a checklist of PCO’s personal qualities.
Using the PCOPERF 3A or the rating summary form as guide, read carefully
the dimensions and their respective indicators. For Parts I and II, rate the PCO by
placing in the box/blank space provided in the PCOPERF 3B or worksheet the
numerical rating for every performance indicator. On the space provided, please cite
the significant/critical incident/s to support extreme rating (highest or lowest) on a
specific performance indicator. For Part III, check in the box the trait(s) exhibited by
the PCO.
Point Numerical
PARTS DIMENSIONS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Weighted Score
Allocation Rating
a. Quality of work 9.0 x =
Output 9.0 x =
I. b. Timeliness of work
(25 pts)
c. Quantity of work 7.0 x =
a. Decision-making 4.0 x =
b. Planning 3.0 x =
II.
c. Implementation of Instructions 3.0 x =
d. Creativity/Resourcefulness 2.0 x =
C Job Knowledge 3.0 x =
e. Analytical Ability
O (25 pts)
f. Problem Solving/Troubleshooting 3.0 x =
R g. Oral and Written Communication 3.0 x =
E h. Community Oriented Policing 2.0 x =
i. Law Enforcement and Maintenance of Law and Order 2.0 x =
a. Control of Activities 4.0 x =
C
b. Cost Control 3.0 x =
O
c. Records Mgmt and Submission of Reports 3.0 x =
M Supervisory Control
d. Compliance with and Implementation of Policies/SOPs 3.0 x =
(20 pts)
P e. Sense of Priority 3.0 x =
E f. Client Satisfaction/Orientation 2.0 x =
Honest Civic-minded
Personal Qualities 10.0 x =
III. Loyal to the Organization Well-groomed
(10 pts)
Initiates Positive
Responsible
Action(s)
Dedicated to Service Courteous/Tactful
Nr of Traits with Check Marks
TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE (TWS)
NUMERICAL PERFORMANCE RATING (NPR) = TWS ÷ 5
EQUIVALENT ADJECTIVAL PERFORMANCE RATING (APR) (Please refer to NPR-APR Table)
Rater’s Assessment of Ratee: I certify that this report represents my best judgment. [ ] I DO [ ] I DO NOT recommend this personnel be granted (a) promotion
(b) designation to higher position (c) relief.
This personnel needs improvement on the following:
Significant/Critical Incident(s)
I certify that this report was referred to the Grievance Committee for review and evaluation.
______________________________
Signature
Head, Grievance Committee
Rating Table for Performance Indicators Rating Table for Personal
Traits
Numerical Rating Rating Criteria Numerical Number of Traits
5 Exceeds standards Rating
4 Always meets standards 5 Nine (9) to Ten (10)
3 Occasionally meets standards 4 Seven (7) to Eight (8)
2 Seldom meets standards 3 Five (5) to Six (6)
1 Never meets standards 2 Three (3) to Four (4)
1 Two (2) or less
NPR-APR Table
Numerical Adjectival
Performance Rating Performance Rating
(NPR) (APR)
91 – 100 Outstanding (OS)
81 – 90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS)
71 – 80.99 Satisfactory (SF)
70.99 - below Poor (PR)
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
*Significant (highest rating)/critical incidents (lowest rating) are situations or incidents that
the ratee manifested during the rating period that have bearing in the performance of
his/her duties.
PART II. CORE COMPETENCIES – (65 pts)
This refers to the core competencies which are basic and essential in order to deliver
effectively. On the space provided, please cite critical incidents to support extreme rating of each
competence.
1. JOB KNOWLEDGE - 25 %
(This dimension measures the PCO’s broad understanding of the job, techniques,
principles, technical disciplines, procedures, other professional skills and application to
relevant fields of work that contribute significantly to the attainment of the unit’s goals).
a. DECISION-MAKING 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
b. PLANNING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
d. CREATIVITY/RESOURCEFULLNESS 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
f. PROBLEM SOLVING/TROUBLESHOOTING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
h. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
d. COMPLIANCE WITH AND IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICIES/SOPs 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
(This dimension measures the manner by which a PCO accomplished his work
through other people).
a. MOTIVATION 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
b. WORKGROUP MANAGEMENT 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. COORDINATION 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
INSTRUCTIONS: Listed below are traits that a PCO is expected to possess. If during the evaluation
period a PCO exhibited any of the traits listed below, place a check mark corresponding to the trait
exhibited. Rate the PCO according to the rating scale found at the bottom part of this page. If
he/she exhibited good/desirable traits not included in the list, write them inside the box provided
(Note: avoid listing down synonym traits –i.e. courteous – polite, etc.)
RATING CRITERIA:
ASSESSMENT OF RATEE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/COMMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGED:
SIGNATURE: ___________________________________________________________
RANK/NAME: ___________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST)
(MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: _________________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
CONFORMED:
SIGNATURE: ____________________________________________________________
RANK/NAME: ___________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST)
(MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: _________________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
ATTESTED:
SIGNATURE: ___________________________________________________________
NAME: ________________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST)
(MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: _________________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Annex “B”
This Police Officer Performance Evaluation Rating form has three (3) major
parts, namely: Part I –Output; Part II - Core Competencies; and Part III - Personal
Qualities. Parts I and II are divided into dimensions and indicators. Part III is a
checklist of PCO’s personal qualities.
Using the PCOPERF 2A or the rating summary form as guide, read carefully
the dimensions and their respective indicators. For Parts I and II, rate the PCO by
placing in the box/blank space provided in the PCOPERF 2B or worksheet the
numerical rating for every performance indicator. On the space provided, please cite
the significant/critical incident/s to support extreme rating (highest or lowest) on a
specific performance indicator. For Part III, check in the box the trait(s) exhibited by
the PCO.
NPR APR
91 – 100 Outstanding (OS) – Achieved exceptional performance clearly higher than competent
peers. Exceeded all or most objectives and added value beyond the scope of the
normal job.
81 – 90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS) – Achieved completely all aspects of most objectives of the
normal job and even exceeded in some areas. Consistently demonstrated competency.
Honest Civic-minded
Personal Qualities 10.0 x =
III.
(10 pts) Loyal to the Organization Well-groomed
Initiates Positive Action(s) Responsible
Dedicated to Service Courteous/Tactful
Nr of Traits with Check Marks
TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE (TWS)
NUMERICAL PERFORMANCE RATING (NPR) = TWS ÷ 5
EQUIVALENT ADJECTIVAL PERFORMANCE RATING (APR) (Please refer to NPR-APR Table)
Rater’s Assessment of Ratee: I certify that this report represents my best judgment . [ ] I DO [ ] I DO NOT recommend this personnel be granted (a) promotion
(b) designation to higher position (c) relief.
This personnel needs improvement on the following:
Significant/Critical Incident(s)
I certify that this report was referred to the Grievance Committee for review and evaluation.
______________________________
Signature
Head, Grievance Committee
Rating Table for Performance Indicators Rating Table for Personal
Traits
Numerical Rating Rating Criteria Numerical Number of Traits
5 Exceeds standards Rating
4 Always meets standards 5 Nine (9) to Ten (10)
3 Occasionally meets standards 4 Seven (7) to Eight (8)
2 Seldom meets standards 3 Five (5) to Six (6)
1 Never meets standards 2 Three (3) to Four (4)
1 Two (2) or less
NPR-APR Table
Numerical Adjectival
Performance Rating Performance Rating
(NPR) (APR)
91 – 100 Outstanding (OS)
81 – 90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS)
71 – 80.99 Satisfactory (SF)
70.99 - below Poor (PR)
*SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
*Significant (highest rating)/critical incidents (lowest rating) are situations or incidents that
the ratee manifested during the rating period that have bearing in the performance of
his/her duties.
PART II. CORE COMPETENCIES – (70 pts)
(This refers to the core competencies which are basic and essential in order to deliver
effectively. On the space provided, please cite critical incidents to support extreme rating of each
competence).
a. DECISION-MAKING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
b. PLANNING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. IMPLEMENTATION OF INSTRUCTIONS 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
d. CREATIVITY/RESOURCEFULLNESS 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
h. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
2. SUPERVISORY CONTROL – (25 pts)
(This dimension measures the PCO’s awareness of control procedures in doing the
job).
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. RECORDS MANAGEMENT AND SUBMISSION OF REPORTS 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
e. MOTIVATION 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. COORDINATION 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
PART III. PERSONAL QUALITIES - (10 pts)
(This refers to PCO’s personal characteristics or traits which enhance his performance)
INSTRUCTIONS: Listed below are traits that a PCO is expected to possess. If during the evaluation
period a PCO exhibited any of the traits listed below, place a check mark corresponding to the trait
exhibited. Rate the PCO according to the rating scale found at the bottom part of this page. If
he/she exhibited good/desirable traits not included in the list, write them inside the box provided
(Note: avoid listing down synonym traits –i.e. courteous – polite, etc.)
RATING CRITERIA:
ASSESSMENT OF RATEE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/COMMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGED:
SIGNATURE: ___________________________________________________________
RANK/NAME: ___________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST) (MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: _________________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
CONFORMED:
SIGNATURE: ____________________________________________________________
RANK/NAME: ____________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST) (MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: __________________________________________________________
ATTESTED:
SIGNATURE: ___________________________________________________________
NAME: ________________________________________________________________
( LAST) (FIRST) (MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: _________________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Annex “C”
This Police Officer Performance Evaluation Rating form has three (3) major
parts, namely: Part I –Output; Part II - Core Competencies; and Part III - Personal
Qualities. Parts I and II are divided into dimensions and indicators. Part III is a
checklist of PCO’s personal qualities.
Using the PCOPERF 1A or the rating summary form as guide, read carefully
the dimensions and their respective indicators. For Parts I and II, rate the PCO by
placing in the box/blank space provided in the PCOPERF 1B or worksheet the
numerical rating for every performance indicator . On the space provided, please cite
the significant/critical incident/s to support extreme rating on a specific performance
indicator. For Part III, check in the box the trait(s) exhibited by the PCO.
NPR APR
91 - 100 Outstanding (OS) – Achieved exceptional performance clearly higher than
competent peers. Exceeded all or most objectives and added value beyond the
scope of the normal job.
81 – 90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS) – Achieved completely all aspects of most objectives of
the normal job and even exceeded in some areas. Consistently demonstrated
competency.
71 – 80.99 Satisfactory(SF) – Achieved the essential requirements and attained minimum
expectations. Usually demonstrated competency.
70.99 - below Poor (PR) – Fell short of expectations and still needs improvement.
Demonstrated little competency and needs skills/capability upgrading.
Honest Civic-minded
Personal Qualities 10.0 x =
III.
(10 pts) Loyal to the Organization Well-groomed
Initiates Positive Action(s) Responsible
Dedicated to Service Courteous/Tactful
Nr of Traits with Check Marks
TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE (TWS)
NUMERICAL PERFORMANCE RATING (NPR) = TWS ÷ 5
EQUIVALENT ADJECTIVAL PERFORMANCE RATING (APR) (Please refer to NPR-APR Table)
Rater’s Assessment of Ratee: I certify that this report represents my best judgment. [ ] I DO [ ] I DO NOT recommend this personnel be granted (a) promotion
(b) designation to higher position (c) relief.
This personnel needs improvement on the following:
Significant/Critical Incident(s)
I certify that this report was referred to the Grievance Committee for review and evaluation.
__________________________________
Signature
Head, Grievance Committee
Rating Table for Performance Indicators Rating Table for
Personal Traits
Numerical Rating Rating Criteria Numerical Number of Traits
5 Exceeds standards Rating
4 Always meets standards 5 Nine (9) to Ten (10)
3 Occasionally meets standards 4 Seven (7) to Eight (8)
2 Seldom meets standards 3 Five (5) to Six (6)
1 Never meets standards 2 Three (3) to Four (4)
1 Two (2) or less
NPR-APR Table
Numerical Adjectival
Performance Rating Performance Rating
(NPR) (APR)
91 – 100 Outstanding (OS)
81 – 90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS)
71 – 80.99 Satisfactory (SF)
70.99 - below Poor (PR)
*SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
*Significant (highest rating)/critical incidents (lowest rating) are situations or incidents that
the ratee manifested during the rating period that have bearing in the performance of
his/her duties.
PART II. CORE COMPETENCIES – (75 pts)
This refers to the core competencies which are basic and essential in order to deliver
effectively. On the space provided, please cite critical incidents to support extreme rating of each
competence.
(This dimension measures the PCO’s broad understanding of the job, techniques,
principles, technical disciplines, procedures, other professional skills and application to
relevant fields of work that contribute significantly to the attainment of the unit’s goals).
a. DECISION-MAKING 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
b. PLANNING 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. IMPLEMENTATION OF INSTRUCTIONS 2.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
d. CREATIVITY/RESOURCEFULNESS 1.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
h. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING 3.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
i. MOTIVATION 5.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
e. PROMOTING PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
c. COORDINATION 4.0
SIGNIFICANT/CRITICAL INCIDENT/S:
PART III. PERSONAL QUALITIES (10 pts)
(This refers to PCO’s personal characteristics or traits which enhance his performance)
INSTRUCTIONS: Listed below are traits that a PCO is expected to possess. If during the evaluation
period a PCO exhibited any of the traits listed below, place a check mark corresponding to the trait
exhibited. Rate the PCO according to the rating scale found at the bottom part of this page. If
he/she exhibited good/desirable traits not included in the list, write them inside the box provided
(Note: avoid listing down synonym traits –i.e. courteous – polite, etc.)
RATING CRITERIA:
ASSESSMENT OF RATEE
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
_________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/COMMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGED:
SIGNATURE: __________________________________________________
RANK/NAME:__________________________________________________
(LAST)
(FIRST) (MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: ________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
CONFORMED:
SIGNATURE: ____________________________________________________
RANK/NAME:____________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST)
(MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION:___________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
ATTESTED:
SIGNATURE: ____________________________________________________
NAME: _________________________________________________________
(LAST) (FIRST)
(MIDDLE)
DESIGNATION: __________________________________________________
COMMENTS:
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES
1. Republic Act 6975, otherwise known as the “Department of the Interior and
Local Government Act of 1990 as amended”
6. PNP Circular Nr DPL 001-95 “Providing for the Specific Authority Delegated
to the D-Staff “