[ AMENDED SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 3-2000, June 27, 2000 ]

[ AMENDED SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 3-2000, June 27, 2000 ]

[ AMENDED SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 3-2000, June 27, 2000 ]

ADOPTING THE SUPREME COURT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM (SCPES) AND THE FORMS FOR MONTHLY PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL REPORT AND FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

WHEREAS, Resolution No. 99-1792 of the Civil Service Commission (CSC) dated 11 August 1999 prescribes revised policies to enhance the performance evaluation system of government agencies; and CSC Memorandum Circular No. 13, series of 1999, requires all government agencies to prepare and submit to the CSC not later than 30 June 2000 a revised Performance Evaluation System;

WHEREAS, per Administrative Order No. 80-2000 dated 19 June 2QQ.0, the Supreme Court created a Performance Evaluation and Review Committee, which shall, inter alia , "study, evaluate, revise, or modify the draft Performance Evaluation System and Performance Evaluation Forms submitted by the Office of Administrative Services";

WHEREAS, on 27 June 2000, the Performance Evaluation and Review Committee submitted the following:

a) Supreme Court Performance Evaluation System; b) Monthly Performance Appraisal Report Form; c) Performance Evaluation Form for Supervisors; d) Performance Evaluation Form for Non-Supervisors

copies of which are hereto attached as Annexes "A," "B," "C," and "D," respectively, and are made integral parts of this Administrative Circular;

WHEREAS, the above-mentioned papers faithfully embody the purpose and objectives of CSC Resolution No. 99-1792 and CSC Circular No. 13, series of 1999.

NOW, THEREFORE, the aforementioned Supreme Court Performance Evaluation System (SCPES for brevity) is hereby approved and ADOPTED; and the aforementioned Monthly Performance Appraisal Form, Performance Evaluation Form for Supervisors and Performance Evaluation Form for Non-Supervisors are approved and PRESCRIBED.

The Office of the Clerk of Court and the Office of Administrative Services shall implement this Administrative Circular and cause the distribution of copies thereof to all concerned.

The Office of the Chief Justice shall furnish the Civil Service Commission with a copy of this Administrative Circular.

This Administrative Circular shall take effect on 01 July 2000.

Issued this 27th day of June 2000.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR

Chief Justice

Amended Supreme Court Performance Evaluation System (SCPES)

In line with the Revised Policies on Performance Evaluation System enunciated under CSC Resolution No. 99-1792 and CSC Memorandum Circular No. 13, s. 1999, the following performance evaluation system to be referred to as the Supreme Court Performance Evaluation System (SCPES) is hereby adopted for implementation and strict compliance by all concerned.

I. Policies

The SCPES adheres to the principle of performance-based security of tenure. It provides motivation and basis for incentives to performers and applies sanctions to non-performers;

The SCPES operates on shared commitments and objective measures of performance results. Performance targets and standards or measures of results are planned and agreed upon by supervisors and employees;

The SCPES enhances productivity by encouraging the formulation and adoption by supervisors and subordinates of performance targets and standards attuned to organizational goals and mandate;

The SCPES recognizes the role of multi-stakeholders in the objective assessment and monitoring of the performance of each employee. It utilizes a cross-rating system between and among the supervisors, subordinates, peers, client and the employee-ratee; and

The SCPES promotes transparency and provides mechanism for appeals and resolution of conflicts and/or disagreements.

II. Objectives

The SCPES aims:

to continuously foster improvement of the performance and efficiency of each employee;

to enhance organizational effectiveness and productivity; and

to provide an objective performance rating which serves as basis for personnel actions, incentives, rewards and administrative sanctions.

III. Scope and Coverage

The SCPES shall apply to all employees below the level of Chief of Office in the Supreme Court, Office of the Court Administrator, Judicial and Bar Council, Presidential Electoral Tribunal and Philippine Judicial Academy.

IV. Rating Period

Performance evaluation shall be every six (6) months ending on June 30 and December 31 of every year. However, if there is a need for a shorter or a longer period, the minimum appraisal period is at least ninety (90) calendar days or three (3) months while the maximum is not longer than one (1) calendar year.

V. Procedures

1. Creation of a Performance Evaluation Review Committee (PERC)

Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 80-2000 dated June 19, 2000, a Performance Evaluation Review Committee (PERC) of the Supreme Court is hereby created with the following as Chairman and Members:

Chairman - Atty. Maria Yolanda M. Panaguiton

Court Attorney VI, Office of the Chief Justice

Vice-Chairman - Atty. Eden T. Candelaria

Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Administrative

Officer, Office of Administrative Services

Members - Mrs. Corazon M. Molo

OIC, OAS-OCA

Atty. Enriqueta E. Vidal

Asst. Clerk of Court, First Division

Atty. Ma. Lourdes G. Perfecto

President, Supreme Court Association of Lawyer-Employees (SCALE)

Mr. Jose G. Ang

President, Supreme Court Employees Association

(SCEA), to represent the rank and file for second level positions

A representative from the 1st level position to be nominated by the association.

Recorder-Secretary - Atty. Ma. Carina M. Cunanan

The chiefs of offices or services shall be automatic members of the PERC during the review of their subordinates' performance ratings.

2. Responsibilities of the PERC

a. Review of Employees' Performance Targets

The PERC shall initiate the review and comparative assessment of employees' performance targets to ensure rationalization of employee workload, particularly of those holding similar positions and working under same work conditions, and shall recommend necessary modifications or corrective action, if necessary.

b. Review of Performance Standards

The PERC shall review performance standards adopted for each duty of a position in the different organizational units in the agency. It shall also ensure the adoption of uniform standards of measurements in rating employees holding similar positions, performing similar functions and working under same conditions.

a. Determination of Final Rating

At the end of the rating period, the PERC shall review documents, evaluate work accomplishments and performance ratings, conduct hearings or dialogues, if necessary, provide opportunities for employee or supervisor to defend a particular rating and eventually determine the employees' final rating. The PERC shall complete the review and approval of employees' rating not later than thirty (30) days after the Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA has submitted the same to the former.

b. Monitoring and Evaluation of SCPES

The PERC shall monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the SCPES every year and shall implement improvements essential to ensure its continued suitability to the different positions and needs of the Court.

c. Setting of Internal Rules and Procedures

The PERC shall adopt its own internal rules, procedures and strategies in carrying out the above responsibilities including the setting of schedules of meetings and deliberations, creation of a Secretariat and delegation of authority to representatives in case of absence of its members.

VI. A. Setting of Performance Targets and Standards

a. 1. Organizational Targets

The supervisors and subordinates shall, by mutual agreement, formulate and set their performance targets and standards attuned to the mandate and goals of their respective organizational units. It shall be prepared not later than the last quarter immediately preceding the rating period. Organizational targets refer to short-range (annual or semiannual) expected accomplishments set to achieve objectives.

a. 2. Employee Targets

Performance Target refers to the duties or work assignments given by the supervisor to the subordinate, with the work output of each duty clearly explained by the supervisor and fully understood by the subordinate. Each employee shall prepare his/her performance targets using the prescribed Performance Evaluation System Form-1 (PEF-1).

B. Setting of Performance Standards

Each employee shall also set performance standards together with the targets.

Performance Standards are measures or yardsticks against which performance level is assessed. It is the product of mutual agreement among members of the organizational unit or between the supervisor and the subordinate. This includes measures of quality, quantity and timeliness. For this purpose, the general standards hereunder are hereby set.

C-l. Timeliness

10 points

-

Task completed within the first 30% or more of the time before the deadline or scheduled time of completion; Task completed ahead of the planned time by 30% for non-routine duty.

8 points

-

Task completed in 15-29% of the time before the deadline or scheduled time of completion; Task completed ahead of the planned time by 15% to 29% for non-routine duty.

6 points

-

Task completed on the deadline or up to 14% of the time before the deadline or scheduled time of completion; Task completed on deadline or planned time or earlier but not more than 14% of the planned time for non-routine duty. 3 reminders issued by rater for repetitive/routine duty.

4 points

-

Task completed 51-99% of the time after the deadline or scheduled date of completion; Task completed after the deadline or planned time by 51-99%; 4 or 5 reminders issued by rater for repetitive/routine duty.

2 points

-

Task not accomplished at all or completed 50% or more of the time after the deadline or scheduled date of completion; Task not completed after the deadline or planned time by 50% or more for non-routine duty; 6 or more reminders by rater for repetitive/routine duty.

C-2. Quality of Written Work

10 points

-

No mistakes or deficiency; every aspect of work assignment well covered; clearly presented; well organized; No lapse in grammar or error in content.

8 points

-

One or two minor errors or deficiencies; work in accordance with instructions; clearly presented; well organized; 1 or 2 errors in grammar or errors in content.

6 points

-

More than two minor errors or deficiencies; partial minor revision needed; 3 lapses in grammar or errors in content.

4 points

-

One or two major errors or deficiencies; major revision needed; 4 or 5 lapses in grammar or errors in content.

2 points

-

Work not acceptable; needs total revision; 6 or more lapses in grammar or errors in content.

C-3. Quality of Non-Written Work

10 points

-

Excellent results; all aspects of work assignment thoroughly covered; No mistake in performing the duty.

8 points

-

One or two minor errors in the execution of work assignment results still very good; 1 or 2 mistakes in performing the duty.

6 points

-

More than two minor errors or deficiencies in the execution of work assignment; results are acceptable; 3 mistakes in performing the duty.

4 points

-

One major error or deficiency that can be overcome with help from supervisor; 4 or 5 mistakes in performing the duty.

2 points

-

Haphazard or careless execution of work assignment; unacceptable results; 6 or more mistakes in performing the duty.

C-4. Quantity of Work

10 points

-

Target or quota exceeded by 30% or more; Planned quantity in six (6) months exceeded by 30% or more.

8 points

-

Target or quota exceeded by 15-29%; Planned quantity exceeded by 15% to 29%.

6 points

-

Target or quota accomplished as expected or up to 14% in excess of the target or quota; Planned quantity just met or exceeded but by not more than 14%.

4 points

-

Only 51-94% of target quota accomplished; Only 51% to 94% of planned quantity accomplished.

2 points

-

Less than 50% of quota or target accomplished; Only 50% or less of planned quantity accomplished.

D. Submission of Performance Targets, Standards

The performance targets of employees must be submitted to the PERC not later than fifteen (15) days before the start of the rating period.

E. Confirmation

The employees' performance targets shall be confirmed by the PERC before the rating period but not later than the 15th day of the start of the rating period. Performance targets shall become final or valid in case the PERC failed to act on it within fifteen (15) working days upon submission.

The PERC shall stamp its certification of review and confirmation on the individual performance targets should it find them acceptable. It shall also ensure that no alteration in the confirmed performance targets and standards are made during the evaluation process.

In instances of obvious disparity in the distribution of assignment and workload among employees, the PERC, through the concerned division chiefs and unit heads, shall cause the necessary corrective action in consultation with the concerned employees.

F. Modifications

Employees' performance targets for a given rating period which are duly confirmed by the PERC may still be modified based on changes brought about by new mandates and programs of the agency in general and the organizational unit in particular.

Modification of the originally planned targets may also be allowed in cases where an employee is given special assignments that would significantly affect the accomplishment of the original targets. It is understood, however, that such special assignments will no longer be treated as intervening tasks.

G. Progress Review

The supervisor and the ratee shall meet at least once a month to review progress of work accomplishments. They shall focus their review or discussion on problems and difficulties encountered and find ways to resolve the same. For this purpose, the supervisor shall devise mechanisms to review work progress.

H. Appraisal/Rating Proper

At the end of the evaluation period, the supervisor and the employee shall meet to discuss the latter's accomplishments against established targets and standards. They shall both give their ratings in the prescribed form (PEF-1) and discuss/settle differences, if any.

The supervisor shall gather, tabulate, summarize and present all the ratings to the employee-ratee. Together, they compute the overall performance rating of the employee using the prescribed weight allocation and computation under this system.

The rater's comments and recommendations are required in the space provided for in (PEF-1), to serve as guide in improving employee performance in subsequent evaluation periods and in other appropriate personnel actions.

VII. MECHANICS OF RATING

1. Levels of Performance

Each employee is rated on the basis of the levels of performance as follows:

ADJECTIVAL RATING

NUMERICAL DESCRIPTION

POINT SCORE (Final Numerical Rating)FNR

Outstanding - Accomplishment exceeded the planned targets by 30% and above 9.50-10.00

Very Satisfactory - Performance exceeding targets by15% to 29% of the planned targets 7.51-9.49

Satisfactory - Performance of 100% to 114% of the 4.01- 7.50 planned targets

Unsatisfactory - Performance of 51% to 99% of the planned targets 2.01-4.00

Poor - Performance failing to meet the planned targets by 50% or below 2.00 & below

2. Components of Rating

The overall rating of employees for a given period consists of two (2) parts: Part I (Performance) and Part II (Critical Factors)

PART I - PERFORMANCE

Performance is given a weight of 70% of the overall rating of the employees. Performance is the evaluation of actual accomplishment versus the planned level of performance in terms of quantity, quality and timeliness of work based on pre-set standards by management or, in the absence of such, the performance standards agreed upon by both the supervisor and the ratee duly confirmed by the PERC.

The agency will adopt a system to classify a job or work target or output and assigns a corresponding percentage or weight on such targets based on the nature, complexity, difficulty level and processes involved.

EXAMPLE:

for work or assignment involving technical, non- routinary, complex functions and those requiring research and without precedent case

70%

For work or assignment involving clerical, routinary and simple functions

30%

TOTAL 100%

Each of the above weight allocation may further be broken down to smaller or bigger weights depending on the number, nature, complexity, processes involved and difficulty of work targets/assignments given to the employee provided that the total aggregate weight does not exceed 100%. The resulting equivalent point score is then multiplied by 70% which accounts for the overall weight of Part I.

PART II - CRITICAL FACTORS

Critical factors is given a weight of 30% of the overall rating to the employees: 10% for supervisor; 5% for employee/self; 5% for peers; 5% for subordinates; and 5% for clients. Critical Factors reflects the behavioral dimensions that affect the job performance of the employee. For this purpose, factors like character and integrity, punctuality and attendance, leadership, initiative, job knowledge, human relations, stress tolerance, organizational ability, cooperation, aptitude and adaptability will be used, depending on the behavioral requirements of the job.

a. Punctuality and Attendance

Punctuality and attendance is rated not separately from each other but as combined factors treated as one item of Part II. Fifty percent (50%) of the rating of this factor is based on records such as DTR, bundy cards, pass slips and leave applications, etc. and the other 50% is based on actual attendance or presence in the place of work as may be observed.

This factor is rated as follows:

Punctuality

10 - Not more than 3 times tardy/undertime during the last 6 months

8 - 4-6 times tardy/undertime

6 - 7-10 times tardy/undertime

4 - 11-15 times tardy/undertime

2 - more than 15 times tardy/undertime

Attendance

10 - Not more than 4 days absent

8 - 5-8 days absent

6 - 9-12 days absent

4 - 13-16 days absent

2 - more than 16 days absent

For this purpose, authorized vacation leave with pay and sick leave with or without pay, scheduled leave, maternity leave, paternity leave and privilege leave of absence are not included in the counting of the number of days absent.

Only disapproved leave of absence shall be counted as number of days absent.

The ratings for the rest of the critical factors shall be based through objective observation by the supervisor and the employee as raters.

b. Performance of Intervening Tasks

The performance of intervening or additional tasks is duly considered only if these tasks were done simultaneously with the planned targets.

Intervening tasks are those which are neither inherent nor directly related to the employee's plantilla or designated positions and may include memberships in ad-hoc committees, research work and other similar assignments which require a considerable amount of effort and time of the employee and are duly covered by an office order.

The employee's performance of intervening tasks may be given a maximum of one (1) additional point to his/her overall rating, provided the following criteria are met:

Said task is difficult, technical in nature or requiring special skills;

Said task is not within the regular functions of the employee or the work program/performance contract of his/her division or unit;

There is urgency in the completion of the intervening task which has an impact on the organizational unit concerned;

Non-compliance/performance of the intervening task will unduly prejudice the service;

Employee's planned targets were all accomplished and rated at least satisfactorily; and

Performance or completion of said intervening task will require an aggregate period of one week to two months.

Special or additional assignments are no longer considered intervening tasks if they will significantly affect the performance of the employee's regular targets. In such a case, the same is treated as an allowable modification of regular target.

3. Cross Rating

The SCPES uses a cross rating scheme which involves multiple raters other than the supervisor, under this scheme, each rater is allocated percentage weight as follows:

RATER

OVERALL WEIGHT

SUPERVISOR RATER

50%

SELF RATER

20%

SUBORDINATE RATER(S)

10%

PEER RATER(S)

10%

CLIENT RATER(S)

10%

100%

In no instance will the self rater be assigned a percentage weight higher than that of the supervisor rater.

For purposes of cross-rating, the above raters are described as follows:

Supervisor Rater - refers to the immediate and direct superior of the Employee-Ratee who, by the nature of his position or authority given by a competent authority, assigns work to the employee, monitors and evaluates the same on the basis of agreed targets and standards. The Supervisor Rater rates the Employee-Ratee in both Part I - Performance and Part II - Critical Factors using the prescribed Performance Evaluation Form (PEF-1).

Self Rater - refers to the employee whose performance is to be rated based on agreed targets and standards. The Self Rater rates himself in both Part I - Performance and Part II - Critical Factors using the prescribed Performance Evaluation Form (PEF-1).

Subordinate Rater - refers to the employee under the immediate or direct supervision of a superior whose performance is to be rated on the basis of verifiable and observable work accomplishments and behavior. The Subordinate Rater rates his supervisor using the prescribed Subordinate Rater Form (PEF-2) consisting of a set of questions about the ratee's performance and demonstrated behavior for the rating period.

Peer Rater - refers to the co-employee with the same position title or functionally-related position of comparable level within the same organizational unit who may have either direct or indirect working relationships with a peer whose performance is to be rated. A peer is considered to have a direct working relationship with another peer if their work are dependent upon each other for support or in producing an output or achieving each other's target.

Indirect working relationships means that the Peer Rater and Peer Ratee perform similar work wherein each other's output is not necessarily dependent on each one but can be noticed or observed by either of the two.

The Supervisor Ratee and Employee Ratee identify and agree on who the Peer Raters would be before the start of the rating period.

The Peer Rater rates the Peer Ratee using the prescribed "Peer Rater Form" (PEF-3). Only the averages of all peer ratings are reflected in the final Performance Evaluation Form.

Client Rater - refers to any person or individual transacting official business or directly served by the Employee-Ratee. The Client Rater(s) may be external or internal clients. There could be many Client Raters involved in one employee ratee.

In cases where it is impractical to get all client feedback on account of volume and time, the Supervisor Rater and the Employee Ratee may agree on a random selection of sampling of client raters distributed evenly during the rating period.

For this purpose, the clients are informed that they are encouraged to give a written feedback on the way they were treated or served by the employees they are transacting business with using the prescribed "Client Rater Form" (PEF-4). the feedback report may either be confidential (sealed) or not.

The Supervisor Ratee collects, tabulates, summarizes all client ratings and presents them to the Employee-Ratee during the appraisal discussion. Only the averages of all client ratings for both Part I and Part II are reflected in the final Performance Evaluation Form (PEF-1).

The Supervisor or the Employee-Ratee sees to it that safeguards are instituted to objectively gather or collect performance feedback from clients. In cases where there is a lack of any one, any two or all three of the subordinate rater, peer rater and client rater, the corresponding weights assigned are divided equally between the Supervisor Rater and the Self Rater.

VIII. How to Compute the Rating

A. Supervisor and Employee Ratings on Part I - Performance

During the appraisal discussions at the end of the rating period, the Supervisor Rater and the Self-Rater fill-up the accomplishment portion of the targets and accomplishment column of the PEF-1.

Afterwards, they rate each accomplishment by comparing the targets against the actual job accomplishment. The quality (QL), quantity (QN) and timeliness (T) standards earlier set are used in giving each accomplishment a numerical point rating.

Add all the point scores under QN, QL, and T for each work/activity for each rater and divide by the number of entries to get their respective Average Point Scores (APSs).

Multiply each Average Point Score by the assigned percentage weight for each work or activity to get the Equivalent Point Scores (EPSs).

Add all Equivalent Point Scores (EPSs) of both the Supervisor Rater and Self Rater separately to get their respective Total Equivalent Point Scores for Part I.

Multiply separately the Total Equivalent Point Scores of both Supervisor Rater and Self Rater by 70% to get their respective Weighted Average Scores (WASs).

B. Supervisor and Employee Ratings on Part II

Using the PEF-1, the Supervisor Rater and Self-Rater rate each factor. There should be at least three factors to be used for each ratee.

Add all Supervisor Rater Point Scores and all Self Rater Point Scores, then divide by the total number of entries to get their respective Average Point Scores (APSs) for Part II.

Multiply each Average Point Scores (APSs) by 30% to get the Weighted Average Score (WAS) for each rater in Part II.

C. Subordinate(s), Peer(s) and Client(s) Ratings

Compute the average ratings of each category of raters for Part I and Part II separately.

Multiply the resulting average ratings by 70% for Part I and by 30% for Part II to get the Weighted Average Scores.

D. Overall Rating

Using the summary of rating portion of PEF-1, indicate the Raters Weighted Average Scores for both Part I and Part II.

Add the Weighted Average Scores for Part I and Part II of each rater to get the Overall Point Scores and multiply by the Rater's Percentage Weight Allocation to get their respective Overall Weighted Scores.

Add all Overall Weighted Scores to get the Total Average Score or Final Numerical Performance Rating.

Add the rating for Intervening Task, if any.

Convert the Total Overall Score or Final Performance Numerical Rating to adjectival rating using the conversion table.

IX. Performance Evaluation Forms (PEF)

The agency HRMO sees to it that all officials and employees are properly oriented on how to accomplish the following performance evaluation forms:

PEF 1 - Performance Evaluation Form contains the work targets, accomplishments, ratings of Supervisor and Employee-Ratee on Part I and Part II and the Summary of Ratings showing the final performance numerical and adjectival ratings of the employee.

It also contains the signed agreement of the supervisor and the employee. PERC action and the rater's comments and recommendations.

PEF 1 - is the form used in all stages of the performance evaluation process, it is also the form to be used by the supervisor and the self-rater.

PEF 2 - Subordinate Rater Form (SRF) consists of a set of questions about the ratee's job accomplishment and demonstrated behavior affecting the employee's performance for the rating period as can be observed and verified by the subordinate rater.

PEF 3 - Peer Rater Form (PRF) consists of questions about the ratee's job accomplishment and demonstrated behavior as observed by the Peer Rater affecting the peer ratee's performance for the rating period.

PEF 4 - Client Rater Form (CRF) consists of questions about the ratee's job accomplishment and demonstrated behavior as observed by the rater affecting the ratee's performance for the rating period.

X. Submission of the Accomplished Performance Evaluation Forms

1. Submission to the Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA

The accomplished Performance Evaluation Forms (PEFs) with the final ratings shall be furnished the employee concerned immediately before submission by the Chiefs of Office/Service to the Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA, which shall not be later than the 15th day after the end of the rating period.

2. Submission to the PERC

The Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA shall consolidate all the employee ratings and prepare a report to the PERC containing the statistics on PEF submission, distribution of ratings and list of protested or appealed ratings, if any, including all documents relative thereto. It shall submit all the above documents to the PERC within 30 days after the end of each rating period.

The performance ratings of officials and employees who, during the rating period, are on official travel, approved leave of absence, or training or scholarship programs, shall be that which they obtained in the preceding rating period.

3. Submission to the CSC Field Office

The Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA shall submit to the Civil Service Commission Field Office a list of all employees showing their individual performance rating not later than three (3) months after every rating period.

XI. Sanctions

Non-submission by the rater of the accomplished performance evaluation forms to the Office of Administrative Services-SC/OCA within the prescribed reglementary period shall be a ground for:

Employees' disqualification for performance-based personnel actions which would require the rating for the given period such as promotion, training or scholarship grants, and productivity incentive bonus if the failure of the submission of the performance evaluation form is the fault of the employee.

Employees who fail to rate themselves will not be given final ratings.

Administrative sanction for violation of reasonable office rules and regulations and simple neglect of duty for the supervisors or employees responsible for the delay or non-submission of said performance targets and performance evaluation forms or both. Administrative action shall also be filed against the rater for using the SCPES to give undue advantage or disadvantage to the employees they rate.

The procedure for filing complaints and imposing administrative sanctions shall be in accordance with the Uniform Rules in the Conduct of Administrative Investigation.

XII. Uses of Performance Ratings

1. Performance-Based Security of Tenure

Security of tenure of those holding permanent appointments is not absolute but is based on performance. Employees who obtained Unsatisfactory ratings for two rating periods and Poor rating for one evaluation period may be dropped from the rolls.

2. Eligibility/Qualification Performance-Based Awards and Incentives

Grant of incentives like the productivity incentive bonus or other performance based incentives and awards shall likewise be based on the final ratings of employees as approved by the PERC. The PERC shall validate.the Outstanding Performance ratings and may recommend concerned employees for performance-based Awards.

3. Basis for Performance Ratings

The performance ratings shall be used as basis for promotion, training and scholarship grants and other personnel actions. Only employees with Outstanding and Very Satisfactory performance ratings shall be considered for the above mentioned personnel actions and other related matters.

XIII. Transparency on Performance Ratings

General information on the final ratings of the employees or the number of the employees who got a particular rating (O, VS, S, US or P) per organizational unit shall be made known to both management and the rank and file employees, subject to the procedures set by the PERC.

XIV. Appeals

Employees who feel aggrieved or dissatisfied with their final performance ratings can file an appeal with the PERC copy furnished the Office of Administrative Services within ten (10) days from the date of receipt thereof.

Employees, however, are not allowed to protest the performance ratings of their co-employees. Ratings obtained by other employees can only be used as basis or reference for comparison in appealing one's performance ratings.

The PERC shall decide on the appeals within one (1) month from receipt of the records from the Office of Administrative Services.

XV. Effectivity

The SCPES shall take effect upon approval by the Civil Service Commission (CSC). It shall, however, be pilot tested starting January 1, 2001 and its result to be submitted to the CSC for approval prior to its final implementation in July 2001.

Issued this 13th day of November 2000.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR

Chief Justice

TIMETABLE OF PES ACTIVITIES

PERIOD/TIME

ACTIVITY

PERSON/S RESPONSIBLE

Within ninety (90) days before start of rating period

Organizational planning and target standards setting

Top and Middle Management Supervisors

Within thirty (30) days before the start of rating period

Individual employee's targets and standards setting. Accomplishing the PEFs Submission of PEFs to HRMO or Personnel Dept./Unit

Individual employees in consultation with their supervision

Supervisors

Within fifteen (15) days before start of rating period

Submission of perfomance targets and standards

HRMO

Within fifteen (15) days before and fifteen (15) days after start of rating period.

Review and confirmation of performance targets and standards

PERC

During the rating period

Recording of accomplishment and critical incidents;

Accumulation of Client Ratings

Monitoring and progress review

Supervisors/Employees

OD/BAP/Supervisors

Supervisors/Employees

Within fifteen (15) days after rating period

Consolation of recorded work accomplishments and crictical incidents

Comparison of targets and result

Appraisal discussion

Preparation of ratings

Submission of PEFs with final ratings to HRMO

Supervisors/Employees

Supervisors/Employees/Peers/Subordinate

Within thirty (30) days after rating period

Submission of PEFs with ratings to the PERC

HRMO

Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of individual PEF with ratings

Review and confirmation of ratings of individual employees

PERC

EQUIVALENT POINT SCORES

Part II - Critical Factors

1. COURTESY AND HUMAN 7. COOPERATION

RELATIONS (For Non-Supervisor)

( For Supervisor & Non-Supervisor)

a. 4 points a. 4 points

b. 10 points b. 10 points

c. 6 points c. 2 points

d. 2 points d. 6 points

e. 8 points e. 8 points

2. PUNCTUALITY & ATTENDANCE 8. JOB KNOWLEDGE

(For Supervisor & Non-Supervisor) (For Non-Supervisor)

A. B. a. 6 points

a. 10 points a. 10 points b. 8 points

b. 8 points b. 8 points c. 10 points

c. 6 points c. 6 points d. 2 points

d. 4 points d. 4 points e. 4 points

e. 2 points e. 2 points

3. INITIATIVE 9. LEADERSHIP

(For Supervisor & Non-Supervisor) (For Supervisor)

a. 10 points a. 6 points

b. 8 points b. 4 points

c. 6 points c. 10 points

d. 4 points d. 2 points

e. 2 points e. 8 points

4. HABITS, CHARACTER & INTEGRITY 10. ORGANIZATIONAL ABILITY

(For Supervisor & Non-Supervisor) (For Supervisor)

a. 4. points a. 8 points

b. 6 points b. 2 points

c. 8 points c. 6 points

d. 10 points d. 10 points

e. 2 points e. 4 points

5. STRESS TOLERANCE 11. JUDGMENT/DECISION-MAKING

(For Supervisor & Non-Supervisor) (For Supervisor)

a. 4 points a. 10 points

b. 2 points b. 4 points

c. 10 points c. 6 points

d. 8 points d. 8 points

e. 6 points e. 2 points

6. APTITUDE & ADAPTABILITY

(For Non-Supervisor)

a. 2 points

b. 8 points

c. 10 points

d. 6 points

e. 4 points

(see Performance Evaluation System Form from pages 1 to 8)