Performance Evaluation and Feedback on Accomplishment of 1995 Work Plans Submitted Pursuant to RMO No. 65-94, and Other Performance Factors

August 21, 1995 REVENUE MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 24-95 (superseded by RMO 38-95) SUBJECT : Performance Evaluation and Feedback on Accomplishment of 1995 Work Plans Submitted Pursuant to RMO No. 65-94, and Other Performance Factors TO : All Internal Revenue Officers and Others Concerned I. OBJECTIVES : This Order is issued to: 1) Prescribe the procedures for evaluating the accomplishments on attainment of 1995 Work Plans key events and performance measures and other factors of the offices of the Assistant Commissioner, Regional Director, Revenue District Officer and Division Chief. 2) Provide a feedback system to management and the implementor regarding the performance and ranking of different offices in terms of their attainment of different aspects of tax administration programs and activities. II. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 2.1 Policies on Performance Evaluation A. The work plans submitted by the different offices pursuant to RMO No. 65-94 and which contain key events and performance measures and other relevant performance factors, shall be the basis for evaluating the performance of the offices indicated above. B. The accomplishment report on work plans submitted by the different offices shall be compared with their commitment/plans and shall then be one of the basis for measuring the performance of the concerned offices. C. Other factors, such as compliance to reporting requirements, participation in special projects, etc., may be considered in the overall evaluation of performance. D. Those performance factors shall be assigned "weighs" which will be used in scoring and ranking the performance of the different offices. 2.2 Procedures 1. The concerned Assistant Commissioners (ACIRs) shall score the performance of particular offices for each key event prescribed in the work program(s) they are responsible for. In general, this shall be done by comparing actual accomplishments (as indicate in the accomplishment report submitted) with the planned performance measure/goal (as indicated in their work plans). Furthermore, performance factors other than key events prescribed in the work plans may be considered by the concerned ACIR. This can include such factors as compliance to reporting requirements of other instruction/directives, participation in special projects administrated by the ACIR, attendance per meetings, etc. Example: Office: RDO No. x Program : Taxpayer Service and Information Program and other performance factors prescribed by MPS Key Event/Factor Actual Planned Score 1. Conduct 80 seminars 100 seminars 80% Seminar 2. Conduct tri 60 campaigns 50 campaigns 100% media (maximum) campaign 3. etc. The maximum score that can be given for each key event/performance factor is 100%. 2. Using the scores of the key event/performance factor as determined in step (2), the concerned ACIR shall determine the weighted average score (WAS) of each office (Revenue District Office, Regional and National Division) involved in the work program(s) that they are responsible for. The ACIR shall assign "weights" to these key events/performance factor scores to determine the WAS, where the total of these weights should amount to 100%. Example: Office: RDO No. x Program : Taxpayer Service and Information Program and other Performance factors prescribed by MPS Score Weights WAS Key Event/Factor: (a) (b) (a x b ) (from step 1) 1. Conduct 80% 40% 32% seminars 2. Conduct tri- media 100% 20% 20% campaign 3. xxx 90% 10% 9% 4. xxx 40% 10% 4% 5. others 70% 20% 14% TOTAL 100% 79% 3. All ACIRs shall submit the individual WAS of each of the offices covered by their particular programs to the Chief, Planning Division in one consolidated report. 4. Furthermore, all Regional Directors shall submit their respective percentage scores (not exceeding 100%) of the performance on other factors of all their revenue district offices and regional divisions to the Chief, Planning Division. The other factors can include such matters as compliance to reporting requirements or other instructions/directions, participation in special projects of the Regional Directors, attendance in meetings, etc. 5. The Chief, Planning Division shall then determine the weighted average overall score (WAOS) for the different offices indicated in Step 2 of sub-section 2.2., 6. The "scoring weights" indicated in Section III of this order shall be considered in determining the WAOS. Example: Office: RDO No. x WAS Weights WAOS Program/Other (a) (b) ( a x b ) Program Factor (from step 2) 1. Taxpayer 79% 10% 7.9% Service and Information Program 2. Personnel 60% 5% 3.0% Training 3. Financial and 40% 5% 2.0% Administrative Service Improvement 4. Tax Fraud 70% 10% 7.0% 5. Accounts 80% 5% 4.0% Receivable Management 6. Selective 75% 5% 3.75% Audit 7. Third Party 60% 5% 3.0% formation 8. Non-Filer 85% 5% 4.25% Detection 9. Stop-Filer 45% 5% 2.25% Detection 10. TIN Issuance 85% 5% 4.25% 11. Returns 40% 5% Processing 12. Collection 55% 20% 11% Compared to Goal/Previous Year Collection Factor 13. Other 65% 15% 9.75% Performance Factor prescribed by Regional Director TOTAL 100% 64.15% 7. The Regional Director shall be evaluated, among others, on the average WAOS derived by all revenue district and regional divisions under his particular jurisdiction. 8. The Deputy Commissioner shall also evaluate the performance of their respective ACIRs in terms of the quality and effectiveness of the activities that they undertake for the year and submit the results of their evaluation directly to the Commissioner. III. SCORING WEIGHTS FOR WAOS The following scoring weights shall be considered determining the WAOS. Programs/Other Performance Factor Scoring Weight for particular offices RDO LD SID AD CD FD AdD NOD 1. Legal enforcement 85% 2. Tax Fraud 10% 40% 3. Personnel Integrity 40% 4. Accounts Receivable Management 5% 80% 5. Selective Audit 5% 80% 6. Third Party Information 5% 7. Non-Filer detection 5% 8. Stop-Filer Identification 5% 9. TIN Issuance 5% 10. Returns Processing 5% 11. Taxpayer Service and Information 10% 12. Personnel Training 5% 5% 5% 5% 13. Financial & Administrative Service Improvement 5% 85% 85% 14. Collection Compared to Goal/ 20% Previous Year Collection Factor* 15 Other performance factor 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% prescribed by Regional Director 16. National Office Staff Service 100% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Legend: LD-Legal Division SID-Special Investigation AD-Assessment Division CD-Collection Division FD-Finance Division AdD-Administrative Division * To be furnished by Assistant Commissioner, Collection Service IV. EFFECTIVITY This Order shall apply to the 1995 Work Plan performance evaluation. The first report on the WAOS using the procedures prescribed in Steps 1 to 3 sub-section 2.2 shall be forwarded by all ACIRs to the Chief, Planning Division not later than October the entire year of 1995 shall be submitted to the Chief, Planning Division not later than January 25, 1996. Furthermore, the Regional Directors shall submit to the Chief, Planning Division the percentage scores of the performance on other factors of their subordinate offices as prescribed in Step 4 of sub-section 2.2 not later than October 25, 1995 for the first three quarter of 1995 performance and not later than January 25, 1996 for the 1995 from the 1995 performance. Thereafter, the Chief Planning Division, shall submit a consolidated report to the Commissioner, thru channels not later than the 10th day after the receipts of reports from all ACIRs. The Deputy Commissioner shall submit the result of their evaluation of the performance of their respective ACIRs not later than November 6, 1995 for the first three quarters of 1995 performance and not later than February 5, 1996 for the 1995 performance. LIWAYWAY VINZONS-CHATO Commissioner of Internal Revenue