RPMS or Result-Based Performance Management System is making waves among teachers pushing them to either sink or swim, especially, when one performance cycle has come to its end. The stress, the sleepless nights, the hypertensions that it causes during the time when their school work is up to their necks are serious matters but the scene of teachers scrambling to produce papers as evidences of his good or bad performance or their wits coming to an end to beat the deadlines is incredibly absurd and downright comical.
The new method in determining performance rating has been in place since 2015 by virtue of DepEd Order No. 2, Series of 2015 dated 6 February 2015.
The rationale behind the implementation of Result-Based Performance Management System are as follows:
1. The Civil Service Commission (CSC), through the issuance of Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 06 series of 2012 sets the guidelines on the establishment and implementation of Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) in all government agencies. SPMS gives emphasis to the strategic alignment of the agency’s thrusts with the day-to-day operation of the units and individual personnel within the organization. It focuses on the target of performance vis-à-vis the targeted milestone and provides a CREDIBLE AND VERIFIABLE BASIS for assessing the organizational outcomes and the collective performance of the government employees.
2. The adoption of SPMS in the Department of Education strengthens the culture of performance and accountability in the agency with the DepEd’s mandate, vision, and mission at its core.
3. There is a need to concretize the linkage between the organizational thrusts and the performance management system. It is important to ensure organizational effectiveness and track individual improvement and efficiency by the cascading the institutional accountabilities to the various levels, units and individual personnel, as anchored on the establishment of the RATIONAL AND FACTUAL BASIS for performance targets and measures. Finally, it is necessary to link the SPMS with other systems relating to human resources and to ensure ADHERENCE TO THE PERFORMANCE-BASED TENURE AND INCENTIVES.
4. Thus, the DepEd adopts the SPMS as Result-Based Performance Management System. (RPMS)
The RPMS applies to all in the DepEd: from the top level official to the rank and file. It will serve as the basis for the performance of the organization and its units.
How to conduct the RPMS is crux of the matter for those who are involved. For teachers, one performance cycle starts in May and ends in April. There are four stages in the cycle, namely:
i. Performance Planning and Commitment (Phase I)
ii. Performance Monitoring and Coaching (Phase II)
iii. Performance Review and Evaluation (Phase III)
iv. Performance Rewarding and Development Planning (Phase IV)
During planning, the ratee meets with the rater to discuss and agree on the Individual KRAs, Objectives and Performance Indicators as anchored on the Office and Organizational KRAs and Objectives. The Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF)shall be accomplished by the individual teacher to reflect the agreed individual KRAs, Objectives and Performance Indicators.
IPCRF, according to the Order, is defined as the form that shall reflect the individual commitments and performance which shall be accomplished by individual employees. The KRAs or Key Result Areas are broad categories of general outputs or outcomes. It is the mandate or function of an individual employee. It is the reason why the job exists. It is also an area where an employee is expected to focus on. While Objectives are specific tasks which an employee needs to do to achieve his specific KRAs.
Based on the Order, it is the ratee who should design his own KRAs and Objectives based on his job. The rater should guide the ratee and see to it that the KRAs are aligned with the office or organizational goal and that the objectives follow the SMART criteria which stands for SPECIFIC, MEASURABLE, ATTAINABLE, RELEVANT and TIME –BOUND are achievable. When the ratee and the rater are finally in agreement at the beginning of the cycle in May, then that will be the basis for evaluating his performance rating come end of the school year in April.
So what’s the fuss of scurrying for evidences at the evaluation stage (April) when all the teachers have to do is do their job and accomplish what has to be accomplished in their own timeline since they have made their own individual objectives to which the rater has agreed upon in the beginning? None of the above provisions has been put into action. It is the ready- made, one-size-fits-all IPCRF that was released at the evaluation stage and forced to teachers for compliance that made them pull heaven and earth to accomplish. Obviously, these poor teachers were NOT PROPERLY AND EXPLICITLY INFORMED OF THEIR ROLE IN THE RPMS at the beginning of the performance cycle, thus, this madness for papers, junk or otherwise, and almost breaking them to a point, is happening.
This is deplorable and completely inhuman. Whoever did this is either guilty of ignorance or deliberately and maliciously neglecting his duty for his own end. Whatever it is, there should be a time for reckoning and the guilty party should be held responsible.
Teachers have had enough.
By: Luz H. Buensuceso | T-III | BNHS
