Republic of the Philippines

General Santos City

Office of the City Mayor
1.

EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. ___

Series of 2017

AN EXECUTIVE ORDER ADOPTING THE REVISED RULES AND REGULATIONS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE GENERAL SANTOS CITY-STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (GSC-SPMS)

I, RONNEL CHUA RIVERA, City Mayor of General Santos, by virtue of the powers vested in me
by law and the sovereign will of the people, do hereby order the adoption of the revised rules and
regulations governing the implementation of the GSC SPMS as follows:
Section 1. Definition of Terms

For the GSC-SPMS, the following terms shall be construed as follows:

1. Cluster Plan is an annual strategic plan prepared by the department members to show
how cluster targets align with the LGU Vision/Mission.
2. Core Functions are functions mandated by law, such as RA 7160, Executive Orders or
Memoranda which are not identified in the strategic plans or the CLUP/CDS/ELA.
3. Critical Incident Report is a record of events, happenings or actual information affecting
the overall accomplishments of the employee during the particular rating period.
4. Department Performance Management Team (DPMT) is tasked to manage the GSC SPMS
at the department level.
5. Department Plan/Office Performance Indicator Framework (DP/OPIF) is an annual logical
framework matrix showing the department’s expected organizational outcome, including
the Major Final Outputs and strategies to deliver these. Measures for success,
responsibility centers and fund requirements by quarter are included to facilitate
performance measurement and funding requirements for budgeting and procurement
processes.
6. Employee is a plantilla position holder with a permanent status of employment or
someone hired by the city on a temporary or casual basis for a period of not less than 3
months.
7. External Customers are recipients of products, goods and services who are not part of
local government unit administration.
8. Individual Performance Assessment at the end of each rating period, the immediate
supervisor evaluates the performance of each employee based on actual and verifiable
results of performance. The results of coaching and mentoring activities as well as critical
incidents report within the rating period shall be taken into consideration in finalizing the
rating after discussion with the ratee. The average rating of all individuals must not exceed
the office performance rating.
9. Individual Performance Commitment and Review (IPCR) Form contains the performance
targets and accomplishments of an individual employee from the rank of assistant
department head down to job orders. The individual targets emanate from the OPCR for a
particular rating period. This is submitted before the start of the performance period. The
same form is completed by reporting the accomplishments and computing for the
performance rating after the LGU Performance Review Conference. The assistant
department head’s IPCR is reviewed by the Performance Management Team (PMT) while
those of the lower ranks are reviewed by the Department Performance Management
Team (DPMT).
Page 1 of 11
10. Internal Customers are recipients of products, goods and services who are officials or
employees of the city government.
11. Job Order (JO) is contractual worker hired by the city to perform specific tasks for a period
of not less than 3 months. JOs are required to accomplish the IPCR to gauge performance
as basis for contract renewal only.
12. LGU Development Planning Conference is held during the first quarter of the current year.
Department heads present their current year’s accomplishments and identify the
successes, gaps and future directions for the next succeeding AIP and budget year. During
the conference, LGU thrusts and priorities are identified and agreed upon. These serve as
the bases for the AIP and budget call and subsequent department budget proposal as well
as DP-OPIF/OPCR.
13. LGU Performance Review Conference is a city level performance review held at the end of
each rating period. Department Heads present their office accomplishments and rating for
the approval of the City Mayor. The final department rating serves as the basis for rating
the individual employees. The average performance rating of all departments serves as the
LGU performance rating.
14. Major Final Outputs (MFOs) are goods or services that a department is mandated to
deliver to external and/or internal customers through the implementation of programs,
projects and activities.
15. Membership of Employees to Special Bodies/Committees – These include membership of
employees to other mechanisms (e.g. Committees, councils, TWGs) which supports the
delivery of strategic, core or support functions. Its maximum assigned weight in the OPCR
is 2%. Success indicators of these activities shall also be measureable and verifiable (e.g. 10
policy papers submitted to chairperson 3 days before the meeting or forum).
16. Office Performance Assessment is a department level performance assessment based on
comparison of targets against accomplishments with proofs of performance. The data are
inputted into the OPCR which will be presented by the department head in the LGU
Performance Review Conference.
17. Office Performance Review and Commitment (OPCR) Form contains the performance
targets and measures by MFOs of the department for a particular rating period. This is
submitted for review of the PMT and subsequent approval of the City Mayor before the
start of the performance period. This is the same form filled up at the end of the
performance period to show the accomplishments of the department and the resulting
performance rating. The office performance rating is finalized and approved by the City
Mayor during the LGU Performance Review Conference. This form also serves as the
performance target and rating sheet of the department head.
18. Organizational Outcomes are short to medium term benefits to the community due to the
delivery of the department’s MFOs.
19. Outcomes are generally the expected or actual short-term or medium-term behavioral or
institutional changes as attributed to development intervention/s which result in changes
in development condition.
20. Performance Management Team (PMT) is a composite group tasked to manage the GSC-
SPMS to ensure that LGU plans are translated into the budget and subsequently to
performance to achieve the city’s development goals and objectives.
21. Performance Measures are specific, measurable, reliable, accurate and trackable
accountability yardsticks for the MFOs.
22. Performance Targets are predetermined levels of effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness and
costs of MFOs.
23. Sector Outcome is the result of the three-year cluster outputs which are jointly achieved
by several departments.

Page 2 of 11
 24. Societal Goal is the overall development objective of the city to improve quality of life of
the “Generals”.
25. Strategic Functions are major functions identified in the CLUP/CDS/ELA and other
emerging national mandates.
26. Success indicators (SIs) are performance level yardsticks consisting of performance
measures and performance targets. These should be verifiable and auditable but could
vary in subsequent DP/OPIF/OPCR.
27. Support Functions are common to all departments which are administrative and
organizational development focused that facilitate the attainment of strategic and core
functions.

Section 2. Linking Performance Management to National, Regional and City Development Plans and
Budget

The city government employees and job order personnel are mandated to deliver goods and services
that address the current development concerns and issues. Programs/projects/activities to deliver
these services are based on existing national, regional and local development plans within the limits of
the city’s fiscal and outsourcing capacity.

These goods and services are referred to as the department’s major final outputs. These MFOs should
be measurable and verifiable through the identified success indicators (SIs). The SIs contain the targets
and the corresponding performance measures. The planning and budgeting linkage is a strategy to
promote continuity in plan implementation as well as transparency and accountability in fiscal
management by measuring the MFOs. This should also emphasize the meaning and importance of
planning as a function that should precede the budget and the subsequent link of the budget to
performance.

The city, through its various departments, shall identify and prioritize its MFOs and propose adequate
budget for the same. Once appropriations become available, the GSC SPMS will ensure that programs,
projects and activities are implemented in the most effective, efficient and timely manner for the
benefit of the intended beneficiaries.

The GSC-SPMS Calendar below details the various LGU activities that link the plan to the budget and the
appropriations to performance management. When a deadline for an LGU activity falls on holidays or
non-working days, due date will be the next working day.
2.1 GSC SPMS Calendar
This is a general calendar of activities to be observed by all levels to ensure the linkage of plans to
budget and appropriations to performance measurement.

DEVELOPMENT PLANS SUBMIT TO DEADLINE

1. 3-Yr Cluster Plan/ Executive-Legislative Agenda
CMO/CPDO August 15 of local election year

2. Annual LGU Development Planning Conference

(facilitated March (last week)
by CPDO)

3. AIP (as input to Department Plan/OPIF and

CPDO April 15
budget for next year)

4. Annual Department Plan/OPIF (as input to

CPDO/CBO May 30
budget for next year)

5. Budget Proposal for next year

CBO July 30

6. Revised Department Plan/OPIF for next year

PMT November 30
(adjustment based on approved budget)

Page 3 of 11
 PERFORMANCE PLANS SUBMIT TO DEADLINE DEADLINE
for 1ST SEM for 2ND SEM
performance performance plan
plan
1. OPCR – DH & IPCR-ADH (for next year)
PMT December 15 June 15

2. IPCR - Staff (for next year)

DPMT December 15 June 15

PERFORMANCE REPORTS SUBMIT TO DEADLINE DEADLINE

1ST SEM 2ND SEM

1. Quarterly Department Accomplishment Report CPDO 20th day of the 1st month of the
following quarter

2. Quarterly Cluster Accomplishment Report CMO/CPDO 30th day of the 1st month of the
following quarter

3. Office Performance Assessment DH June 30 December 30

4. Semestral Cluster Performance Review &

(facilitated
Planning July 15 Jan. 15
by cluster)

5. OPCR
PMT July 30 January 30

6. Semestral LGU Performance Review Conference

(facilitated August 15 February 15
by CPDO)

7. IPCR -Staff
DPMT August 30 March 1

Section 3. Development Planning Process

The macro development planning process is spearheaded by the City Development Council and the City
Planning and Development Office. The outputs of the process include the formulation of long, medium
and short term development plans generally known as the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
Comprehensive Development Plan/City Development Strategies/Executive and Legislative Agenda Local
Development Investment Program and Annual Investment Programs. The vision, mission and goals set
in these development plans shall be the bases for department planning and budgeting as well as
performance planning and commitment. The Cluster Plans and Department Plans/OPIF serve as the
operational plans while the OPCR and IPCR serve as the performance plans and performance evaluation
sheets at the same time.
Development follows the cycle whereby the city plans for results (outputs and outcomes), budgets for
results, implements for results and monitors and evaluates the results in the long, medium and short
term and rewards laudable accomplishments and then plans again for the next development cycle.
3.1 Major Final Outputs (MFOs) and Success Indicators (SI)

The strategy for implementing the MFOs shall be the various programs, projects and activities (PPAs) of
the department which should be designed in such a way that the MFOs can be achieved and measured
through the various SIs.

During the process of development planning, department MFOs and SIs should be formulated to be
measurable and verifiable and contribute to organizational (department level), sectoral (Good
Governance, Livability, Bankability and Competitiveness) outcomes and societal goal of the city which
were set in the major development planning documents.

Page 4 of 11
In formulating the department MFOs and SIs, the department should consider its strategic
responsibilities as reflected in the CDS/ELA and cluster plans, its core mandates based on RA 7160 or
other legislations as well as its support functions. All departments shall rationalize their MFOs and see
to it that these truly contribute to its organizational and sectoral outcome and finally to the societal
goals. Existing programs, projects and activities that no longer contribute to these development
directions shall be changed or retrofitted. MFOs proposed for the AIP and the Department Plan/Office
Performance Indicator Framework must be within the LGU capacity to fund or if available, other sources
with fund commitment (pipeline).

MFOs on providing cut across department requirements (e.g. procurement of LGU shared equipment
such as generators) shall be targeted by the department based on its core function or mandate.
In general, MFOs should:
 Simply describe what are the goods or services to be delivered without reference to its quality;
 Provide information to policy and decision makers and the public on the nature of the goods or
services for which public funding is provided;
 Have a clearly identifiable client;
 Be measurable, manageable, and auditable;
 Be within the department’s control;
 Be sufficient in number to fulfill strategic, core and support functions of the department; and
 Be delivered through PPAs with corresponding fund.
To check whether MFOs are delivered, SIs need to be formulated. The SI is formulated as a combination
of the performance measure and the performance targets. Performance measures may fall within one,
a combination of two or all of the following categories:

Category Definition
Effectiveness/ The extent to which actual performance compares with targeted
Quality/ performance.
Quantity The degree to which objectives are achieved and the extent to which
(Output) targeted problems are solved. This usually refers to quantity and quality of
planned outputs. In management, effectiveness relates to getting the right
things done without reference to costs, effort and time. Basically,
effectiveness is goal oriented; adequate to accomplish a purpose; producing
the intended or expected result.
Efficiency The extent to which time or physical resources is used for the intended task
or purpose. Measures whether targets are accomplished with a minimum
(Outcome)
amount or quantity of waste, or unnecessary effort. This means “doing the
thing right”. Efficiency is effort, process, goal and time oriented. It means the
ability to produce something with a minimum amount of effort, time and
physical resources. For ease in measuring and monitoring performance,
efficiency of departments will be rated in terms of fund utilization. For
individuals, efficiency will be measured in terms of time and resources spent
in producing the output and the correctness of the process used.
Timeliness Measures whether the deliverable was done on time based on the
requirements of the law and/or clients/stakeholders. Based on the ARTA,
response time to simple requests is 5 days; for complex requests, response
time is 10 days.
Time-related performance indicators evaluate such things as project
completion deadlines, time management skills and other time-sensitive
expectations.

Page 5 of 11
The Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) as a special body critical to the procurement process and
subsequent department performance will be treated as an office and shall have its own DP/OPIF, OPCR
and IPCR for individuals therein. The Committee shall be rated according to its own performance. The
Committee and TWG members shall be rated and recognized based on their performance in their
respective mother unit. For reassigned employees and other staff of BAC Secretariat, they will be rated
and recognized under the Committees’ performance.

3.2 Technical Assistance in the preparation of Plans/Office Performance Indicator Framework

The City Planning and Development Office as the Performance Management Team Technical Secretariat
shall provide technical assistance in the formulation of cluster plans and Department Plans/Office
Performance Indicator Framework to ensure the consistency of MFOs and SIs with the City
Development Plans. The department heads shall ensure that department programs, projects and
activities contribute to or are essential to the attainment of MFOs and SIs that are geared to the
improvement of the quality of life of the constituents and address existing and emerging development
issues and concerns.

Section 4. Annual Investment Program and Department Plan/Office Performance Indicator

Framework (DP/OPIF)
The shift from input-based budget to a policy-driven and output-based budget is emphasized. In order
to synchronize results with fund requirements, each department shall prepare its Annual Investment
Program and Department Plan/Office Performance Indicator Framework. This will ensure that all
requirements of the various PPAs to implement the MFOs are provided with funds. Costing should be
done by PPA whose outputs should contribute to the attainment of results that are measureable by SIs.
If one MFO has several PPAs, cost of each PPA should be added to form the total for each MFO. This
would enable future computation of cost-benefit ratio of PPAs to help determine effectiveness and
efficiency of PPAs in delivering the MFO. The total fund requirements of the DP/OPIF shall be within the
financial and outsourcing capacity of the LGU.
In preparing the DP/OPIF, each department should be guided by its own logical framework in
determining its MFOs and SIs including their costs and responsibility centers. In cases where targeted
outputs cannot be quantified, the use of percentages maybe allowed to measure effectiveness.
* NOTE: Where a department such as City Social Welfare and Development Office, City Field Health
Services Department, General Santos City Hospital, City Agriculturist’s Office, City Veterinarian’s Office,
City Engineer’s Office, City Economic Management and Cooperative Development Office, among others
has outsourced assistance in the form of cash or kind, the amount should be reflected in a corresponding
PPA. The MFOs and SIs of these external assistance should be clearly shown in the DP/OPIF and OPCR.
The PMT may organize a workshop or series of workshops to clarify issues regarding this matter.

Section 5. Annual LGU Development Planning Conference

Prior to the Annual LGU Development Planning Conference, each department shall conduct a strategic
planning session to agree on what MFOs for the ensuing year can contribute to attainment of the
desired organizational outcomes and contribute to sectoral outcomes and city development goals.
Not later than March 31 of every year, the Local Chief Executive will conduct an LGU wide Development
Planning Conference to be attended by the Vice Mayor, members of the city council and all department
heads. In this conference, development issues and concerns relative to the service delivery of the
departments will be discussed. It is essential that the department heads bring the latest
accomplishment report and show the extent of development changes and gaps if there are, as a result
of their performance and basis for their next year’s plan and budgetary requirements. From there, the
ensuing year’s city development thrusts, priorities and targets will be agreed and later form the basis
for the preparation of the Annual Investment Program of all departments and correspondingly, the
budget call. This will be facilitated by the City Planning and Development Office in coordination with the
Local Finance Board to ensure the link of plan, budget and performance management. This strategy will
ensure that the plans which are outputs of the LGU Planning Conference are sufficiently allocated with
resources or budget.

Page 6 of 11
After the conference, the departments shall finalize their AIPs, proposed budget and DP/OPIF based on
the agreements.

Section 6. GSC-SPMS Cycle

The GSC SPMS shall follow the usual four stages of performance management system cycle as follows:

6.1 Performance Planning and Commitment

6.1.1 OPCR/IPCR Preparation

a. After the revision of the DP/OPIF, each department will finalize its Office Performance and
Commitment Review (OPCR) Form for each rating period. The OPCR will be taken from the
revised DP/OPIF to show the work distribution by MFOs and SIs.
b. For each SI, the category of the applicable variable (Effectiveness (Q), Efficiency (E) and
Timeliness (T) shall be properly noted in the OPCR to facilitate performance evaluation and
rating.
c. After preparing the OPCRs, the IPCRs are prepared by all LGU employees from division level
down to Job Order workers. The division/unit head and the section head will be jointly
accountable in the delivery of the division MFOs/SIs.
d. The MFOs and SIs in the DP/OPIF shall be numbered consecutively and appropriately carried
over to the OPCR and IPCR to facilitate cascading of work outputs and consequently aid in
monitoring and evaluation and performance assessment.
e. Before the start of the second semester, the same cycle is followed after adjusting the targets
and schedules based on the first semester performance.

6.1.2 Availability of Job Orders as Planned and Funded

Appointing authorities should ensure that contracts of planned and funded job order workers are
issued in time with the planned project implementation so as to ensure continuity of services.

6.2 Performance Monitoring and Coaching

6.2.1 Management Focus
a. Supervisors should focus on monitoring and coaching to track the implementation of PPAs
and individual performance. This is to ensure that MFOs are delivered effectively and
efficiently in a timely manner. The critical role of providing an enabling
environment/intervention to improve team performance and manage and develop individual
potentials must be carried out.
b. The proofs or documentation of coaching and mentoring activities shall be monitored using
the revised form (Annex 7 and 8).
c. The monitoring forms shall be submitted by the supervisors to the department head every
end of the month or whenever higher level intervention is needed. In the absence of these
proofs of performance, the outputs will not be rated.
d. An information system shall be developed to meet the requirements of the GSC-SPMS. This
will be a very vital management tool to support production of information and data
management for program tracking and performance monitoring/reporting.
e. To monitor performance, quarterly cluster and department accomplishment reports must be
submitted based on the GSC-SPMS Calendar.
f. In case of exceptional changes in MFOs, PPAs and SIs due to unforeseen circumstances or
management decisions, said change shall be referred to the PMT for evaluation and approval
of the City Mayor. Subsequently, the OPCR and affected IPCRs will be adjusted accordingly.

Page 7 of 11
 g. In the course of monitoring and coaching and mentoring activities, supervisors have to feedback
to the department head and the employee about any unsatisfactory or poor performance for
appropriate intervention.
h. Not earlier than the 3rd month of the rating period, preliminary rating should be given to
employees with Poor performance in order to improve or address performance gaps.
6.3 Performance Review and Evaluation
At the end of each performance period, the performance of every department and employee shall be
assessed and rated based on the provisions of the GSC SPMS emphasizing on the results of the delivery
of MFOs measured through the SIs. The rating system is scientific and verifiable based on the agreed
targets and measures in the OPCR and IPCR. Results will not be rated in the absence of proofs of
performance.
6.3.1 Rating System
Department and individual performance shall be rated using the SPMS RATING SCALE. This is a five-
point rating scale (1- 5), 5 being the highest and 1, the lowest.

Numerical Rating Description

Adjectival
Performance represents an extra ordinary level of achievement
and commitment in terms of quality, efficiency and timeliness,
Outstanding technical skills and knowledge, ingenuity, creativity and initiative.
5 Employees at this performance level should have demonstrated
(O) exceptional job mastery in a major area/s of responsibility.
Employee achievement and contribution to the organization are
of marked excellence.
Very Satisfactory Performance exceeded expectations. All goals, objectives and
4
(VS) targets were achieved above the established standards.
Satisfactory Performance met expectations in terms of quality of work,
3 efficiency and timeliness. The critical annual goals were met.
(S)
Unsatisfactory Performance failed to meet expectations, and/or one or more of
2 the most critical goals were not met.
(US)
Performance was consistently below expectations, and/or
Poor reasonable progress toward critical goals was not made
1
(P) Significant improvement is needed in one or more important
areas.

Generally, department and individual accomplishments of the SIs shall be rated as follows:
Effectiveness/quality/quantity
Rate of Accomplishments
Adjectival Rate Numerical Rate
O 5
130% & Above
VS 4
100.1% - 129%
S 3
100%
US 2
75% - 99%

Below 1-75% P 1
No Output (0) P 0

Page 8 of 11
For SI on fund utilization, the rating shall be as follows, based on Public Financial Management
Assessment Tool (PFMAT) for Local Government Units:

Rate of Accomplishments Adjectival Rate Numerical Rate

90%-100% of allotments obligated O 5
85%-Below 90% of allotments obligated VS 4
80%-Below 85% of allotments obligated S 3
70%-Below 80% of allotments obligated US 2
Below 70% of allotments obligated P 1

Moreover, departments may choose applicable measures provided in EO 24, s. 2015.

For easy rating of Timeliness for outputs with prescribed deadlines, the following rating shall be
observed:
No output =0
Over the deadline =2
Met on time =3
Before the deadline = 5

6.3.2 Rating Period

A mid-year (January 1- June 30) and/or annual (January to December) performance evaluation of the
physical and financial accomplishments of the departments shall be conducted by the PMT in
coordination with the Local Finance Board (LFB) based on the GSC SPMS Calendar. Results of the
evaluation shall be submitted to the City Mayor and presented in a city level performance evaluation
conference not later than 15 working days after evaluation period.

6.3.3 Procedures in Evaluating Performance

6.3.3.1 Office Performance Assessment

Consistent with the DBM OPIF Guide, the following procedures in evaluating department performance
shall be observed:

a. At the end of the rating period, there shall be a department level evaluation to be based on
comparison of performance targets vs. actual physical accomplishments with verifiable
proofs of performance. The data to be used for the performance evaluation shall be taken
from quarterly accomplishment reports. The scoring system will give points to the
accomplishments in terms of the success indicator categories of effectiveness, efficiency and
timeliness.

b. The cause of any positive or negative slippage in performance will be taken into account
based on proofs of accomplishments and or critical incidents.

c. Department rating shall be the total of 100% for performance. OPCR rating shall be the
rating of the Department Head.
d. The BAC shall evaluate the departments’ Project Procurement Management Plan (PPMP) for
its responsiveness, correctness and completeness for its consolidation into LGU Annual
Procurement Plan (APP) which will be the basis of its or departments’ purchase requests.
This will ensure that department requirements are delivered on time.
e. For the City Engineer’s Office and other similarly situated departments, efficiency shall be
based only on the regular operational budget of the department (MOOE or Program Funds if

Page 9 of 11
 there are) not on the cost of the infrastructure projects to be implemented by contractors.
However, the rating for the performance effectiveness will include infrastructure projects to
be implemented. SIs shall be based on outputs within the control of the department.
f. The results of the department level performance evaluation shall be submitted for validation
by the PMT technical secretariat.
g. After the validation, the department OPCR showing the accomplishments and corresponding
rating will be presented by the department head at the Performance Review Conference.
6.3.3.2 Individual Performance Assessment
a. This follows the same process and rating system as that of the department. The final rating
as approved by the City Mayor during the LGU Performance Review Conference shall be the
basis for computing individual ratings. The average rating of individuals must not be higher
than the department performance rating.
6.3.3.3 Performance Review Conference

a. A semestral or annual LGU Performance Review Conference shall be held by the PMT to be
facilitated by the CPDO.
b. The Chief Executive presides in the conference and hears the department head presentation
of the accomplishments, the challenges faced by the department as well as the department
rating.
c. Any issues and concerns on the rating of a department shall be decided with finality by the
Chief Executive during the conference.
d. After the conference, the PMT through the City Planning and Development Office formally
notifies each department on the approved department rating. No more requests for
reconsideration on the ratings will be entertained. The rating of the Department Heads will
be equivalent to the approved department rating.
7.4 Performance Rewarding
a. After validating the performance of employees with Outstanding rating, the PMT will
recommend the same to the PRAISE Committee as potential awardees for various available
award categories.
b. The employee ratings and competency assessments/Professional Development Plan and
IPCR comments of supervisors shall also be the basis for career pathing or other alternative
opportunities to enhance competencies, provision of any monetary or in kind incentives or
to address any existing gaps.
c. Each department may also choose its own best employee awardee as an automatic nominee
to the LGU best employee award competition.
d. Provision for merit awards due to performance as provided by Civil Service commission and
the Department of Budget and Management may be implemented upon the
recommendation of the PMT.
Section 8. Sanctions
Unless justified and accepted by the PMT, non-submission of the OPCR Form to the PMT, and the IPCR
forms to the HRMDO within the specified dates shall be a ground for:
a. Employees’ disqualification for performance-based personnel actions which would require
the rating for the given period such as promotion, training or scholarship grants and
performance enhancement bonus, if the failure of the submission of the report form is the
fault of the employees.
b. An administrative sanction for violation of reasonable office rules and regulations and simple
neglect of duty for the supervisors or employees responsible for delay or non-submission of
the office and individual performance commitment and review report.

Page 10 of 11
 c. Failure on the part of the department head to comply with the required notices to their
subordinates for their Unsatisfactory or Poor performance during a rating period shall be a
ground for an administrative offense for neglect of duty.
Moreover, late submission is equivalent to non-submission.
Section 9. Appeals
a. Office performance assessment as discussed in the performance review conference shall be
final and not appealable. Any issue/appeal on the initial performance assessment of an
Office shall be discussed and decided by the LCE during the performance review conference.
b. Employees who feel aggrieved or dissatisfied with their final performance ratings can file an
appeal with the PMT within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of notice of their final
performance evaluation rating from the Department Head. An office/unit or individual
employee, however, shall not be allowed to protest the performance ratings of other
office/unit or co-employees. Ratings obtained by other office/unit or employees can only be
used as basis or reference for comparison in appealing one’s office or individual
performance rating.
c. The PMT shall decide on the individual employee’s appeals within one month from receipt.
The City Mayor shall have 15 days to approve or disapprove the PMT decision, otherwise, it
shall be deemed approved.
Officials or employees who are separated from the service on the basis of Unsatisfactory or
Poor performance rating can appeal their separation to the CSC or its Regional Office within
15 days from receipt of the order or notice of separation.

Section 10.Separability Clause

If any section or provision of this Executive Order shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid, the other
sections or provisions not affected thereby shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 11. Amendatory Clause

All orders, rules and regulations and other issuances inconsistent with the provisions of this Executive
Order are hereby deemed amended and modified accordingly. In the course of implementing the GSC-
SPMS, and upon collegial decision of the PMT, any provisions of this IRR that may not be practical or
implementable may be enhanced, changed or rectified by the preparation of policy papers or
resolutions to be approved by the LCE.

Section 12.Effectivity
These rules and regulations shall take effect immediately.

Done in General Santos City, Philippines this ----- day of ------ 2017.

RONNEL CHUA RIVERA

City Mayor

Page 11 of 11