RESULTS BASED

MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM (RPMS)
DEPED ORDER 2, S.
2015

GUIDELINES ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RPMS IN
THE DEPARMENT OF EDUCATION
1. This aims to provide comprehensive

guidelines for the adoption of the

Civil Service Commission (CSC)
Strategic Performance Management
System (SPMS) in the DepEd

SCOPE OF POLICY

These guidelines stipulate the specific

mechanisms, criteria and processes for
the
performance
target
setting,
monitoring, evaluation and development
planning
for
schools
and
offices,
covering all officials and employees,
school-based, in the Department holding
regular plantilla positions.
Personnel
under contracts of service/job order and
LGU-funded employees shall likewise be
covered,
but
for
purposes
of
performance evaluation only.

SCOPE AND POLICY

This DepEd Order provides for the

establishment and implementation of
the RPMS in all DepEd schools and
offices, covering all officials and
employees, school based and non-school
based, in the department

SCOPE AND POLICY

The DepEd sets guidelines on the

establishment and implementation of
RPMS stipulating the strategies, methods,
tools and rewards for assessing the
accomplishments
vis-a-vis
the
commitments.
This will be used for
measuring and rewarding higher levels of
performance of the various units and
development planning of all personnel in
all levels.

SCOPE AND POLICY

. For non school-based personnel, the

RPMS shall provide for an objective

and verifiable basis for rating and
ranking the performance of units and
individual personnel in view of the
granting of the Performance-Based
Bonus (PBB) starting 2015

SCOPE AND POLICY

.For

School-based personnel, the

RPMS shall be used only as an
appraisal tool, which shall be the
basis for training and development.
The granting of PBB shall be
governed by the existing PBB
guidelines

SCOPE AND
POLICY

The DepEd RPMS shall follow the fourstage performance management system
cycle as prescribed by the CSC

Phase I - Performance planning and

commitment
Phase II- Performance monitoring and
coaching
Phase III- Performance review and
evaluation
Phase IV- Performance rewarding and
development planning

RATING THE
OBJECTIVES
Numeric ADJECTIVAL
al Rating RATING

Outstanding

DESCRIPTION OF MEANING OF
RATING

Performance represents an
extraordinary level of
achievement and commitment
in terms of quality and time,
technical skills and
knowledge, ingenuity,
creativity and initiative.
Employees at this
performance level should
have demonstrated
exceptional job mastery in all
major areas of responsibility.
Employee achievement and
contributions to the
organization are of marked
excellence.

Numeric ADJECTIVAL
al Rating RATING

DESCRIPTION OF MEANING OF
RATING

Very
Satisfactory

Performance exceeded
expectations. All goals,
objectives and targets were
achieved above the
established standards

Satisfactory

Performance met
expectations in terms of
quality of work, efficiency and
timeliness. The most critical
annual goals were met.

Numerica ADJECTIVAL
l Rating
RATING

DESCRIPTION OF MEANING OF
RATING

Unsatisfactor Performance failed to meet

y
expectations, and/or one or

more of the most critical

goals were not met

Poor

Performance was
consistently below
expectations, and/or
reasonable progress toward
critical goals was not made.
Significant improvement is
needed in one or more
important areas

Process in Computing
KRAs

The rater and ratee shall ensure that

each KRA has been assigned weight
according to priority

As an option, the rater and the ratee

may assign weights to objectives which
shall be equal to the total weight
assigned to a particular KRA

KRA 1- weight assigned is 40%

Objective 1 20%
Objective 2 10%
Objective 3 10%
Objective 4 10%

The Score per KRA shall be computed

using the formula:
Rating per KRA- Weight x Rating

SAMPLE COMPUTATION

KRAs

Weigh Objectives Weight

t
per
per
Objective
KRA
s

Rating Score

KRA 1

60

20%

0.800

20%

1.000

20%

0.600

10%

0.4000

20%

1.000

10%

0.300

KRA 1

40

Objective
1

Objective
1

Final
Rating

4.1

RANGE

ADJECTIVAL RATING

4.500 -5.00

Outstanding

3-500
4.499

Very satisfactory

2.500
3.499

Satisfactory

1.500
2.499

Unsatisfactory
Poor

Below
1.499

Analysis

of the IPCR
shall be submitted to the
Office of the School
Head, copy furnished the
SDO

COMPOSITION OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

TEAM PMT
DIVISION PMT
SCHOOL
Chair : ASDS

Chair: Principal

Members:

Members :

Planning Officer III

Accountant III
Chief AO V
One (1) Education
Supervisor
One (1) Principals
Representative
One (1)
Representative from
the Teacher
association
One (1) NEU-Div.
Chapter
representative

Four Master Teacher/Head

Teacher
One representative from the
School
Planning Team
One Administrative Officer
representative from nonteaching group
One representative from the
teacher association

FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITUES OF THE PMT

The

Secretariat at each level sets

consultation meeting of all Heads of Offices
for the purpose of discussing the targets set
in the office performance commitment and
rating form
The Planning Office shall ensure that Office
performance targets and measures, as well
as the budget are aligned with those of the
agency and that work distribution of
offices/units is rationalized

 PMT

recommends approval of the

office performance commitment and
rating of the Head of Agency
Personnel Division identifies potential
top performers and provide inputs to
the PRAISE committee for grant of
awards and incentives
PMT adopts its own internal rules,
procedures and strategies in carrying
out the above responsibilities
including schedule of meetings and
deliberations and delegation of
authority to representatives in case of
absence of its members

COMPOSITION
COMPOSITION
OF THE
OFGRIEVANCE
THE GRIEVANCE
COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE
Schools Division
Office
Chair : SDS
Members:
Legal Officer
HRMO
EPS
Accountant
PESPA representative
NEU

Schools
Chair: ASDS
Members:
PSDS
HRMO
Principal
Master Teacher/Head
Teacher
Teachers Association

DIVISION
OFFICE

SIGNING AUTHORITIES

Division Office
RATEE

RATER

1. Superintend
ent

Asst.
Regional
Director

APPROVING
AUTHORITY
Regional
Director
Asst. RD

2. Asst. SDS

Superintend
ent

3. Chief of
Division

ASDS

SDS

4. Educ. Prog.
Supervisor

Chief of
Division

Asst SDS

5. District
Supervisor

Chief of
Division

Asst SDS

6. Section
Chief of
Chief/Unit Head Division

Asst. SDS

Schools
RATEE

RATER

1. Principal

Asst.
Superintende
nt

APPROVING
AUTHORITY
Superintend
ent

2. Head/Master
Teacher
Principal

Superintend
ent

3. Teacher

Head
Teacher/Mast
er Teacher

Principal

4. NonTeaching

Principal

Administrati
ve Office V
SDO

PLAN YOUR WORK, WORK

YOUR PLAN