This document is an individual performance commitment and review form for an elementary school principal. It outlines the principal's key result areas (KRA's) and objectives for the review period of January to December 2015. It also provides the performance indicators and weighting for each KRA: Instructional Leadership (40%), Learning Environment (10%), Human Resource Management (20%), Parent Involvement (10%), and School Leadership (20%). The principal's actual results will be rated on a scale of 1 to 5 for each indicator based on evidence provided.

1. INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT AND REVIEW FORM
Name of Employee : __________________________ Name of Rater : ___________________________
Position : Elementary School Principal I Position : Public School District Supervisor
Review Period : January – December Date of Review : , 2015
Division : Dipolog City Division
TO BE FILLED IN DURING PLANNING TO BE FILLED IN DURING EVALUATION
MFO’S KRA’S OBJECTIVES TIMELINE
WEIGHT
PER
KRA
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
(Quality, Efficiency, Timeless)
ACTUAL
RESULTS
RATING SCORE
I. EFFICIENCY
Improved NAT
result by 2% for
S.Y. to 89%
A. Instructional
Leadership
 Account learning
outcomes of school goals
and targets.
 Performinstructional
supervision to achieve
learning outcomes.
Year Round 40%
5-NAT Performance and GSA is 130% and above
4-NAT Performance and GSA is 115-129%
3-NAT Performance and GSA is 100-114%
2- NAT Performance and GSA is 59-99%
1- If NAT Performance and GSA is 50% and below
Safe and child
friendly learning and
school environment
B. Learning
Environment
 Provide safe and child
friendly atmosphere and
school environment for
learners
Year Round 10%
5-130% and above accomplishment on the following
(supported by evidence such as school policy, reports
information materials advocacy activities, regular
meetings, inventory)
 Adhered to child friendly environment standards and
programs.
 Institutionalized child protection mechanisms and
processes (per DepEd order #40, s 2012)
 Provided ICT facilities/workshop rooms as learning
support systems.
 Has clear DRRM mobilization plans.
4 – all mechanisms mentioned above are present except
for some minimal requirements.
3 - all mechanisms are evidences
2 – Incomplete mechanisms are absence of reports
1 – mechanisms and reports are missing
II. QUALITY
Technical assistance
to teachers on
matters pertaining to
enhancement of
classroom
management skills
C. Human
Resource
Management
and
Development
 Provide technical
assistance to teachers on
matters pertaining to
enhancement of
classroom management,
skills and instructional
competence for support
January to
December
20%
5-130% and above of teachers provided with technical
assistance with corresponding evidences like teachers
portfolio containing observation reports, TSNA results
performance analysis and recommendations for
development interventions performance contracts and
performance evaluation results in prescribed tools
4 – at least 115-129% of teachers provided with technical

2. and instructional
competence to
support service with
RPMS cycle
provided.
services with RPMS cycle. assistance with the required evidences.
3 – at least 100-114% of teachers provided with technical
assistance with the required evidences.
2 – 51-99% of teachers provided technical assistance with
required evidences
1 – 50% and below of teachers provided technical
assistance with evidences.
III. ACCESS
Stakeholders,
community
partnership and
mobilization for
school performance
established
D. Parent
Involvement
and
Community
Partnership
 Establish school, family
and community
partnership / mobilization
to enhance performance
Year Round 10%
5 – has stakeholders partnership / mobilization plan
(complete with reports and documentation of meetings,
agreements) organized programs with stakeholders
especially parents, obtained resources for the school
through stakeholders partnership.
4 – Has mobilization plan and occasionally meets
stakeholders in meeting and activities but some
elements (e.g. not enough resources raised)
3 – Has mobilization plan and occasionally meets
stakeholders but not resulting to resources generated
and evidences are missing.
2 – poor mobilization skills and seldom meets stakeholders
1 – No evidence in this area
Performed School
Leadership
Management
Operations Function
and Data Based
Strategic Planning
(SIP-AIP)
E. School
Leadership
Management
and
Operations
Functions
 Perform School
Leadership Management
Operations Functions and
Data Based Strategic
Planning.
January to
December
20%
5 – with clear financial management system for the school
supported by evidences such as: reports, account logs,
data base system, allocated funds for programs and
school facilities improvements and maintenance.
 Coordinated with stakeholders on resource mobilization.
 Maintained School EBEIS and regularly submit EBEIS
reports to the Division Office.

4 – with clear financial and resource management system
but one or two requirements were missing were
negligible (with complete evidence)
3 – with clear financial and resource management system
but two requirements and / or reports were lacking.
2 – Financial Management System and reporting were in
its initial stages
1 – No Financial Management System and / or reports
observed
OVERALL
RATING
___________________________ ______________________
Rater Ratee