Office Performance Contracting, Review and Evaluation
In 2012, the Civil Service Commission issued Memorandum Circular No. 06 or the Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) which mandates the establishment of performance evaluation system in every department or an agency.
With this, the Department issued Administrative Order (AO) No. 11 Series of 2015, and AO No. 11 Series of 2018 and AO No. 23 Series of 2018 or Guidelines for the DSWD Strategic Performance Management System (DSPMS) to enhance the performance of the department towards the attainment of its mission, vision and long term goals and ensure achievement of organizational outcomes by cascading the DSWD commitments, priorities and institutional accountabilities to the different CO and Regional Offices, its officials and employees through the identification of appropriate performance indicators and targets.
To ensure achievement of the DSPMS objectives, phases of the Performance Management Cycle as stipulated in the guidelines should be conducted which include (a) Performance Planning and Commitment, (b) Performance Monitoring/Checkpoint and Coaching, (c) Performance Review and Evaluation and Performance and (d) Performance Rewarding and Development Planning.
These activities are of great importance since it will provide opportunity to measure how the Field Office NCR, its Divisions/CRCFs and officials and employees effectively and efficiently perform their respective tasks and responsibilities thus, ensure attainment of output/targets.
Phase 1: Performance Planning and Commitment
The DSWD AO 23, series of 2018 indicates that the Performance Planning and Commitment phase of the DSPMS shall be facilitated through consultative approach. This planning process begins with a review of the Department's internal and external context as well as ensuring that the DSWD plans are anchored on the pertinent international and national commitments of the Department.
At the Office Level, the DSWD Regional Offices prepare their OPCs by committing the performance indicators and targets from the Approved Harmonized OPC Indicators and Rating Guide that are related to the mandate and core functions of their respective offices. Considered as "mini-DSWDs", the OPC of FOs will mirror the overall DSWD Performance Contract, as they perform all functions of the Department only at a smaller scale. However, to preserve the conciseness of the FO's OPC, performance indicators of some mandated functions particularly for support and administrative services are delegated to the Performance Contracts of the Divisions/Center/Residential Care Facilities.
An accompanying document of the Harmonized FO-OPC is the Rating Guide which operationalizes the indicators to be committed for the plan year. The Rating Guide (Annex C) contains all targets and criteria in terms of quantity, quality and timeliness for each performance indicator. Hence, this document shall serve as the basis during office performance contracting and performance review and evaluation (PRE).
Phase 2: Performance Monitoring/Checkpoint
Performance Checkpoints shall be conducted after the first semester to identify missed deliverables and to replan activities to address the delay in the attainment of the commitments. It aims to determine the indicators and targets that were not or may not be accomplished during the rating period, identify additional deliverables not committed in the approved OPC and adjust deliverables and targets for the rating period.
Monitoring of performance and accomplishments can be facilitated through regular meetings, one-on-one discussions, and review of pertinent documents such as reports, among others. This shall be documented using the Performance Monitoring and Coaching Journal (Annexes F-H).
Phase 3: Performance Review and Evaluation
In this stage, accomplishments are assessed based on the attainment of the commitments identified during the planning process (Phase 1). Performance review and evaluation are conducted through performance assessment session. It aims to determine the performance ratings of the DSWD Offices by assessing the performance and accomplishments vis-à-vis the physical and financial targets committed during the rating period. This is conducted semi-annually.
For Field Offices, the performance assessment sessions shall be led by a panel composed of designated members of the Performance Management Team (PMT) with the assistance of the OPC Secretariat.
As pre-work, the FOs shall submit proposed self-ratings for each performance indicator following the criteria stipulated in the approved Rating Guide. These self-ratings together with the proposed ratings provided by the CO-OBS shall be consolidated into comparative rating matrices which shall serve as the basis for the negotiation using the Annex O.
Only ratings for performance indicators not agreed upon by the FO and the CO-OBS (as indicated in the comparative rating matrix) shall be deliberated upon. The FO, through the Regional Director or the Officer-in-Charge, shall present the accomplishments and proposed ratings for each performance indicator. These ratings shall be negotiated with the concerned OBS, and deliberated upon by the panel who shall provide final rating for each indicator. The resulting OPCR form from the session, agreed upon by the panel and Head of Office, shall contain the final Office performance rating.
At the Division level, the Division Chief shall prepare their respective Division Performance Contract and Review (DPCR) within the prescribed performance assessment timeline using the Annex P. The Head of the Office shall conduct a performance assessment session for each Division for the purpose of discussing the Division's accomplishments and determining the final Division performance ratings.
Phase 4: Performance Rewarding and Development Planning
Part of the individual employee's evaluation is the competency assessment vis-à-vis the competency requirement of the job. The result of the assessment shall be discussed by the Heads of the Office and supervisors with the individual employee at the end of each rating period. The discussion shall focus on the strengths, competency-related performance gaps, and the opportunities to address the gaps, career path and alternatives.
Office Performance Contracting
The DSWD Administrative Order (AO) No. 23 Series of 2018, indicates that the Performance Planning and Commitment phase of the DSWD Strategic Performance Management System (DSPMS) shall be facilitated through a consultative approach.
At the office level, DSWD Field Offices (FOs) prepare their OPCs by committing performance indicators and targets related to the mandate and core functions of their respective Offices. Considered as "mini-DSWDs", the OPC of the FOs will mirror the overall DSWD Performance Contract, as they perform all functions of the Department only at a smaller scale. However, to preserve the conciseness of the FOs' OPCs, performance indicators of some mandated functions particularly for support and administrative services are delegated to the OPCs of the Divisions.
The crafting of the FY 2021 Office Performance Contracts (OPCs) generally aims to ensure the attainment of all the Department's commitments. These commitments must be based and aligned with the DSWD's existing strategy and roadmaps.
Specifically, the OPCs aim to determine the success indicators that serve as yardsticks of performance that includes performance measures and performance targets. It also highlights the contribution of each Office to the roadmaps and strategy implementation. Additionally, the OPCs serve as one of the bases for monitoring and evaluation of the Offices' performance vis-à-vis commitment.