Guidelines/Rules and Regulations of the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System

January 23, 2007

CESB RESOLUTION NO. 661-07

GUIDELINES/RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM (CESPES)

WHEREAS, Presidential Decree No. 1, as amended, (Part III, Article IV, Sections 2 and 5) created the Career Executive Service Board (CESB) "to serve as the governing body of the Career Executive Service" and mandated it to "promulgate rules, standards and procedures on the selection, classification, compensation, and career development of members of the Career Executive Service";

WHEREAS, the Board, has adopted the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES) for all officials in the Career Executive Service (CES);

WHEREAS, there is a need to revise the existing rules, guidelines and procedures of the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES) to make it more responsive, meaningful, systematic, accountable and practicable, with the purpose of contributing to the fulfillment of the Board's mandate to form a continuing pool of well selected and development-oriented career administrators who shall provide competent and faithful service in the Career Executive Service (CES);

WHEREAS, a set of Guidelines/Rules and Regulations for the CESPES shall greatly facilitate appreciation for the new instrument as well as allow for the smooth regular conduct of the CESPES;

WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, the Board RESOLVES, as it is HEREBY RESOLVED, to adopt the attached Guidelines/Rules and Regulations on the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES);

APPROVED this 23rd day of January 2007 in Quezon City, Philippines.

Approved by:

 

(SGD.) KARINA CONSTANTINO-DAVIDChair

BERNARDO P. ABESAMIS	(SGD.) MARIA PAZ W. FORONDA
Member	Member
(SGD.) ELMOR D. JURIDICO	(SGD.) ANTONIO D. KALAW, JR.
Member	Member
(SGD.) ROLANDO L. METIN	(SGD.) JAIRUS D. PAGUNTALAN
Member	Member

(SGD.) CARINA S. VALERAMember

Attested by:

 (SGD.) BETTINA MARGARITA L. VELASQUEZ Acting Board Secretary

GUIDELINES/RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CAREER EXECUTIVE SERVICE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM (CESPES)

RULE I

Title

SECTION 1. Title. — These rules shall be known and cited as "The Guidelines/Rules and Regulations of the Career Executive Service Performance Evaluation System (CESPES)".

RULE II

Purpose and Components of the CESPES

SECTION 1. Purpose. — The CESPES results shall be used as bases for official personnel actions such as:

A. Original or promotional appointment to CESO ranks;

B. Grant of merit-based incentives, awards, and other forms of recognition;

C. Career planning and development; and

D. Accreditation and availment of incentives granted by the Civil Service Commission (CSC).

SEC. 2. Components. — The CESPES shall have the following components: CScTDE

A. Performance Contract

The Performance Contract measures and assesses the Ratee's performance on the basis of work target commitments established and actually accomplished and completed by the Ratee. These commitments are initially formalized by the Ratee through discussions and in agreement with a Superior Rater in the department/agency. The Performance Contract is accomplished using the Performance Contract and Review Form (PC) to generate the PC Rating for the Ratee. The PC rating shall comprise eighty percent (80%) of the overall CESPES Rating of the Ratee.

The Ratee's commitments are the lists of milestones or resulting outputs intended to be accomplished by the Ratee within a given period of time. Milestones are specific, tangible and measurable outputs (e.g., policies, programs, projects, processes and procedures). They are formulated as statements of outputs which have already occurred or been accomplished for an envisaged target at a specified time. They are stated in terms of the following essential dimensions:

1. Time — answers the questions "when, how long, or how soon" the output will occur or be accomplished;

2. Quantity — answers the questions "how many or how much" of the output will occur or be accomplished;

3. Quality — answers the questions "how well; in what form/manner" the output will occur or be accomplished;

4. Target Stakeholder Affected — answers the question "for whom; who will receive/have access to; who will be influenced by" the output once it has occurred or been accomplished.

Milestones are categorized either as: 1) Leading and Innovating Milestones (LIM) or as 2) Regular/Routine Milestones (RRM).

1. Leading and Innovating Milestones (LIM)

The LIM are outputs resulting from tasks/ functions under the Ratee's scope of responsibilities that the Ratee conceives, initiates and primarily undertakes in the department/agency. LIM are usually purposive innovations and reforms which aim to improve the quality of the department/ agency's structures, systems, operations and resources. They are "value added" measures which ultimately focus on enhancing organizational effectiveness. They are developed and completed within a given period of time — with a definite start and end. Once institutionalized — adopted, mainstreamed and sustained — in the work plan of the department/agency, LIM are converted as Regular Routine Milestones.

2. Regular/Routine Milestones (RRM)

The RRM are outputs resulting from the tasks/functions within the accountability of and performed by the Ratee on a regular basis in the work setting. These tasks/ functions refer to the standard and prescribed technical and administrative work performed by the Ratee needed to conduct and sustain the day-to-day work operations in the department/agency.

B. Behavioral Competence

Behavioral Competence refers to an assessment of the Ratee's executive leadership and managerial competence in the work setting. The assessment shall be determined from scores obtained from different sets of behavioral rating scales accomplished by the Ratee's Superiors and Subordinates. Behavioral Competence is measured using the Behavioral Competency Scale (BCS) to come up with the BC Rating of the Ratee. The BC Rating shall comprise twenty percent (20%) of the overall CESPES Rating of the Ratee. The scales are composed of positive and negative statements on various observable behaviors and attributes in the following dimensions.

1. Creativity and Innovation — the ability to act as a creative resource for others by challenging the status quo, offering innovative approaches, and by promoting an environment conducive to creative and innovative thinking.

2. Critical and Systemic Thinking — the ability to demonstrate high cognitive capacity, quickly grasp and synthesize information, and to assess complex ideas and situations.

3. Environmental Acumen — the ability to understand and align the department/ agency's performance with the structures, functions and objectives of the government and the broader economic, political and administrative mechanisms in which it operates.

4. Honesty and Integrity — the ability to model the highest standards of personal and professional behavior, help in fostering a politically impartial and incorrupt public service, and to harmonize public responsibilities and good citizenship with management practices.

5. Judgment — the ability to gain a broad perspective from all available resources, develop a keen understanding of a situation, reach sound conclusions and decisions based on information gathered, and use intuition as well as common sense and logical analysis in generating and evaluating action plans.

6. Leadership — the ability to develop, communicate and pursue a clear, inspiring and relevant vision and direction that is linked to the overall government strategy. It is also the ability to: 1) act as a catalyst for organizational change by initiating strategies to meet the department/ agency's changing environment; and 2) use appropriate interpersonal styles to gain consensus and cooperation of various stakeholders within and outside the department/agency to facilitate achievement of organizational goals.

C. Area(s) for Improvement

The Area(s) for Improvement is a feedback component of the CESPES. It identifies specific aspects of the Ratee's work performance which fall below the expected quality standards and which need to be improved through the conduct of purposive and appropriate education, training, or other capacity building interventions. The Area(s) for Improvement are discussed by the Rater in the Critical Incidents (CI) and Areas for Improvement (AI) Form and do not contribute to the Ratee's overall CESPES Rating.

D. Critical Incident(s)

The Critical Incident(s) is another feedback component of the CESPES. It is composed of one (1) or more significant anecdotes drawn by the Rater from the Ratee's actual work performance. These anecdotes must be based on incidents actually observed and validated by the Rater who cites and uses them as reference to justify the PC and BC ratings given to the Ratee. The Critical Incidents are discussed by the Rater in the Critical Incidents (CI) and Areas for Improvement (AI) Form and do not contribute to the Ratee's overall CESPES Rating. To ensure fair and fact-based discussion of the Critical Incidents, these anecdotes must be discussed in terms of the:

1. S (Situation) — serves the context for the Ratee's exercise of leadership and/or management functions;

2. T (Task) — identified and expected to be performed by the Ratee in the aforementioned situation;

3. A (Action or Activity) — actually performed by the Ratee in response to the aforementioned situation;

4. R (Results) — referring to the output produced and the outcome (effect/ impact) caused by the action taken by the Ratee on relevant stakeholders.

E. Incentive Points (IP)

The IP are additional merit points accruing to the overall CESPES Rating of the Ratee. These points which are "earned" by the department/agency are commensurate to the status of accreditation accorded to the department/agency based on its overall performance in the CSC accreditation scheme as provided for in CSC Memorandum Circular No. 11, series of 2005. The scheme designed and implemented by the CSC accords different accreditation levels to a department/agency for a fixed period of time after the CSC assesses the extent of completion and the quality of implementation of the department/agency's Performance Management System (PMS).

RULE III

Coverage and Rating Period

SECTION 1. Coverage. — The CESPES shall cover all incumbents of CES positions in various departments and agencies of the national government, including government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) with original charters, for an uninterrupted period of at least three (3) months. Division Chiefs and those occupying lower positions shall be covered by the CESPES provided they are:

A. Career Executive Service (CES) eligibles; Career Service Executive (CSE) eligibles or Career Executive Officer (CEO) eligibles; and,

B. Designated in an Acting or Officer-In-Charge (OIC) capacity.

SEC. 2. Ratee Information Sheet (RIS). — The RIS is the complete, updated and officially certified list of all Raters (i.e., Superiors and Subordinates) who are qualified and designated to rate each individual Ratee's work performance in a given Rating Period. The RIS should be regularly updated by the CESPES Coordinator of the department/agency. (Please see Annex — A).

The RIS shall be officially certified and submitted by the CESPES Coordinator on or before the fourth quarter of the Rating Period (i.e., October — December of the current year) in preparation for the Performance Rating in January of the following year. AHaDSI

No Ratee shall be allowed to undertake the CESPES without his/her RIS submitted to and received by the Career Executive Service Board (CESB).

SEC. 3. Rating Period. — The Rating Period, which refers to the twelve (12) — month year covering January to December, shall embody the time period during which the overall performance of the Ratee shall be the focus and subject of measurement and assessment.

SEC. 4. CESPES Forms. —

The CESPES shall be composed of the following instruments:

A. Performance Contract and Review Form (PC) (Please see Annex — B);

B. Supplemental Performance Contract Form (SCF) — to indicate any changes in the milestones and the corresponding weight allocation adjustments (Please see Annex — C);

C. Adjusted Performance Contract and Review Form (APC) — is a revised and updated PC reflecting all of the changes indicated in the SCF (Please see Annex — D);

D. Critical Incidents (CI) and Areas for Improvement (AI) Form (Please see Annex — E);

E. Behavioral Competency Scale (BCS) for Superior Raters (Please see Annex — Fa), and;

F. Behavioral Competency Scale (BCS) for Subordinate Raters (Please see Annex — Fb);

The CESB shall provide the CESPES Coordinator with electronic copies of the said CESPES instruments. The CESPES Coordinator shall provide the Ratees with electronic or hard copies, as the case may be, of the PC, SCF, APC and the CI and AI Forms.

The CESPES Coordinator shall reproduce hard copies of the BCS for Superior and Subordinate Raters depending on the total number of Raters of all the Ratees in the department/agency. The CESPES Coordinator shall assign a control number to each form and countersign the same. Each Rater in the department/ agency, whether Superior or Subordinate, shall be given only one (1) BCS form with the assigned control number. The CESPES Coordinator shall keep a record of the control number of the BCS form assigned to each Rater.

RULE IV

Frequency and Period of Conduct

SECTION 1. Frequency and Period of Conduct. — The CESPES shall be implemented simultaneously to all covered departments/agencies according to a schedule prepared by the CESB, on an annual basis, commencing in the month of January of the Rating Period, and fully completed not later than the last working day of the month of April of the year succeeding the given Rating Period.

RULE V

The Roles and Responsibilities in the CESPES

SECTION 1. Administration. — The CESB shall primarily administer the CESPES in coordination with the CESPES Coordinator.

SEC. 2. The CESPES Coordinator. — The Human Resource Management and Development Director or the equivalent official heading the unit/service administering and responsible for the CESPES in the department/agency shall be designated as the CESPES Coordinator by the Department Secretary/Head of the Agency concerned. The CESPES Coordinator shall lead all efforts in and be primarily responsible for preparing and capacitating the entire department/agency in the installation, implementation, monitoring and maintenance of the CESPES.

SEC. 3. Roles of CES Officials. — All CES officials covered by the CESPES shall strictly comply with and uphold all policies, rules, guidelines, standards, procedures and mechanisms of the CESPES.

RULE VI

The CESPES Performance Evaluation Cycle and Stages

SECTION 1. CESPES Performance Evaluation Cycle. — The CESPES Performance Evaluation Cycle shall be composed of the following stages:

A. Performance Planning Stage

B. Performance Monitoring Stage

C. Performance Review and Feedback Stage

D. Performance Evaluation and Development Planning Stage

SUBTITLE I

Performance Planning Stage

SECTION 2. Performance Planning Stage. — The Performance Planning Stage shall be undertaken as follows:

A. The Ratee and the Superior Rater shall meet anytime within the first quarter (January — March) of the Rating Period or within the first three (3) months of the assumption of office by the Ratee.

B. The Ratee shall discuss and come to an agreement with the Superior Rater on his/her leading and Innovating Milestones (LIM) and Regular/Routine Milestones (RRM). The LIM and RRM shall serve as work performance targets which the Ratee shall commit to accomplish.

C. Once discussed and mutually agreed upon by both the Ratee and the Superior Rater, the said LIMs and RRMs shall be posted by the Ratee under the column — "Milestones/Performance Objectives" — in his/her Performance Contract and Review Form (Refer to Annex — B) for the Rating Period concerned.

D. The Ratee shall also complete the "Weight Allocation" column of the PC after discussing and coming to an agreement with the Superior Rater on the specific percentage weight to be assigned to each milestone.

E. The CESB shall prescribe the allowable range of percentage weights which may be allocated to LIMs and RRMs for different positions/levels in a department/ agency. A Department/Agency shall determine and officially adopt a percentage weight allocation scheme based on the following ranges:

	Percentage Weight Allocations for Different Positions
Kinds of Milestones	/ Levels Prescribed by the CESB
		Director IV to
	Director I to III	Undersecretary
Leading and innovating	30 — 50%	60 — 80%
Regular/ Routine	50 — 70%	20 — 40%
TOTAL	100%	100%

F. The Superior Rater shall affix his/her signature first, followed by the Ratee, at the first "Concurrence" portion of the PC, and indicate the date of said action. The presence of both signatures indicates the conclusion of all discussions and the validation of all agreements made by both parties.

G. Upon completion of the agreements, the Ratee shall submit the PC to the CESPES Coordinator, who shall reproduce it and provide duplicate copies of the PC for the Ratee, Rater and for himself/herself.

SUBTITLE II

Performance Monitoring Stage

SECTION 3. Performance Monitoring Stage. — The Ratee and the Superior Rater shall meet during the Rating Period after the Performance Planning Stage to hold regular consultation meetings/dialogues. These meetings shall have the objective of monitoring/tracking the Ratee's performance; studying problems, issues and concerns affecting said performance; and enabling the Superior Rater to provide and discuss analysis, advice and other forms of assistance through coaching, mentoring and feedback.

SECTION 4. Use of the Supplemental Performance Contract Form (SCF). — The use of the SCF shall be governed by the following rules:

A. Every time and at any given time within the Rating Period, when at least one (1) milestone/performance objective for the Ratee has to be changed, deleted or added, the Supplemental Performance Contract Form (SCF) (Refer to Annex — C) shall be accomplished.

B. Revisions/modifications and the corresponding changes/adjustments in the percentage weight allocations shall be discussed and agreed upon by the Ratee and the Superior Rater in accomplishing the SCF, following all the procedures and guidelines provided in the Performance Planning Stage. AaSTIH

C. The SCF may be accomplished and completed by the Ratee and the Superior Rater within the given Rating Period at a frequency of not more than once (1) every three (3) months and not later than the month of September of the Rating Period.

D. Every time that an SCF is accomplished, the Ratee shall submit the same to the CESPES Coordinator, who shall reproduce and provide duplicate copies for the Ratee, Rater and for himself/ herself.

SECTION 5. Use of the Adjusted Performance Contract and Review Form (APC). — The use of the APC shall be governed by the following rules.

A. The Adjusted Performance Contract and Review Form (APC) (Refer to Annex — D) shall be completed in the same manner and process as the PC. Once completed and submitted, the APC shall be considered and used as the official replacement of the submitted PC.

B. The APC shall incorporate all changes to be indicated in the PC, based on all completed SCF(s), and those made after September of the Rating Period. The APC shall be submitted not later than the last month of the Rating Period (i.e., December), and shall follow the prescribed policies, rules and guidelines as provided in the Performance Planning Stage.

C. Upon completion of the APC, the Ratee shall submit the same to the CESPES Coordinator, who shall:

1. Check if the contents of the APC completely and accurately reflect all changes that must be indicated in the PC, based on all completed SCF(s) previously submitted by the Ratee; and countersign the APC if it is in order;

2. Reproduce and provide duplicate copies of the APC for the Ratee, Rater and for himself/herself.

D. The APC, submitted to and received by the CESPES Coordinator, shall be considered as the basis of the performance review and feedback process for the Rating Period.

SUBTITLE III

Performance Review and Feedback Stage

SECTION 6. Completion of the PC or the APC. — The completion of the PC or the APC shall be undertaken as follows:

A. The Ratee and the Superior Rater shall meet not later than January or the first month after the Rating Period. The objective of this meeting is to conduct the performance review and feedback.

B. The Ratee and the Superior Rater shall discuss and come to an agreement on all the milestones/performance targets actually achieved by the Ratee, and the status or quality of completion of each of these accomplishments. To facilitate and enhance this process, the Ratee may provide the Superior Rater samples of the actual accomplishments, related evidences, and other supporting data to describe and validate the performance targets actually accomplished.

C. The Superior Rater shall evaluate the status and quality of completion of each of the Ratee's accomplishments based on a review and analysis of the data posted by the Ratee under the columns — "Milestones/Performance Objectives", "Accomplishments" and "Status" — in the PC/APC.

D. For each milestone, the Superior Rater shall indicate a score using the CESPES Rating Scale (Please see Annex — G) as reference to reflect his/her evaluation of the status and quality of the Ratee's actual accomplishments. The Superior Rater shall post the said scores under the column — "Raw Score" of the PC/APC.

E. The Superior Rater shall determine the weighted scores by multiplying each raw score with the corresponding percentage weight allocation for each milestone/performance objective. The sum total of all the posted scores under the "Weighted Score" column of the PC/APC shall then be computed to arrive at the Total Equivalent Point Score, which corresponds to the PC/APC rating of the Ratee.

F. The Superior Rater shall affix his/her signature first, followed by the Ratee, at the second "Concurrence" portion of the PC/APC, and indicate the date of the said action. The presence of both signatures indicates the conclusion of all reviews and evaluations made by both parties.

G. The Superior Rater shall also accomplish the Critical Incidents (CI) and Areas for Improvement (AI) Form (Refer to Annex — E) in relation to the Ratee. ETIHCa

H. Upon completion of the said forms, the Ratee shall submit the fully accomplished PC/APC and CI and AI Form to the CESPES Coordinator, who shall reproduce and provide duplicate copies of the same for the Ratee, Rater and for himself/herself.

SECTION 7. Completion of the Behavioral Competency Scales (BCS). — The completion of the BCS shall be undertaken as follows:

A. The Superior Rater and a predetermined number of Subordinate Raters of the Ratee in the department/agency, as indicated and verified in the RIS, shall be identified. They shall rate the Ratee based on the review and evaluation of specific behaviors manifested by the Ratee and actually and personally observed by the Superior Rater and the Subordinate Raters.

B. Key behaviors, classified under several dimensions, shall, be measured and scored on a scale using the Behavioral Competency Scale (BCS) Form. Depending on the Rater, the said BCS Form has two (2) variations, namely:

1. Superior Rating Form (for use by the, Superior Rater) (Refer to Annex Fa), and the;

2. Subordinate Rating Form (for use by Subordinate Raters) (Refer to Annex Fb).

C. All Subordinate Raters of each Ratee shall be randomly selected using a reliable procedure by the department/ agency CESPES Coordinator from the Ratee's RIS. The number of Ratees shall be in accordance with the table below:

Total Number of Line/	Total Sample Size of Chosen Raters
Staff Subordinates
10 subordinates or less	100 %
11 — 15	11
16 — 20	12
21 — 25	13
26 — 30	14
31 and above	50%

D. The accomplishment of the BCS Form by the Raters may be conducted through a workshop where the Raters gather in one venue to give their ratings.

 The Raters may be allowed to accomplish the BCS Forms outside the workshop conducted by the CESPES Coordinator, provided that they officially state a valid reason for not making it during the scheduled CESPES conduct (e.g. being sick or on Official Business for the duration of the CESPES conduct). In such instances, the accomplished BCS Form shall be sent to the CESB in a sealed envelope, together with a certification by the CESPES Coordinator that the conduct of the CESPES outside the workshop is in accordance with these rules. Absence of the said certification from the CESPES Coordinator shall invalidate the CESPES rating of such Rater.

E. All Superior and Subordinate Raters shall indicate their complete names, positions/designations, other required data, and affix their signatures on the BCS Forms to fully accomplish them. BCS Forms without signatures and/or incomplete data shall be deemed invalid. Substitute Subordinate Raters (i.e., outside of those in the Ratee's RIS) shall be absolutely prohibited.

F. The CESB shall prescribe the allowable range of percentage weights which may be allocated for the sum total of the BCS ratings of the Superior and Subordinate Raters in a department/agency. A department/agency shall determine and adopt a percentage weight allocation scheme based on the following range:

G. The BCS Forms shall be accomplished and submitted by the Superior and Subordinate Raters to the CESPES Coordinator under conditions of strict privacy, full confidentiality, and freedom from any or all forms of duress.

H. The Subordinate Raters shall also accomplish the Critical Incidents (CI) and Areas for Improvement (AI) Form (Refer to Annex — E) in relation to the Ratee.

I. Upon completion of the performance rating process for all the Ratees in the department/agency, the CESPES Coordinator shall collect, organize, document, and secure all BCS Forms and CI and AI Forms. The CESPES Coordinator shall reproduce copies of the BCS Forms and CI and AI Forms for his/her reference.

 The CESPES Coordinator is strictly prohibited from viewing the accomplished BCS Forms of his/her Subordinate Raters when he/she is a Ratee.

SECTION 8. Submission of Accomplished CESPES Forms. — Submission of accomplished CESPES Forms shall be in accordance with the following rules:

A. All accomplished individual PC/APC, BCS, and CI and AI Forms of all Ratees in the department/agency shall be submitted by the CESPES Coordinator to the CESB for the computation of the performance ratings not later than the last working day of February or two (2) months after the Rating Period. Submissions after the said period shall no longer be received nor entertained by CESB and shall cause the Ratee to have no CESPES rating for the Rating Period.

B. No CESPES performance rating processes, outside of the CESB prescribed period herein specified, shall be conducted without prior approval of the CESB. All requests for the conduct of the special CESPES shall be made in writing and addressed to the CESB, specifying the significant circumstances that would justify the conduct of the special CESPES.

C. All Raters, Ratees and CESPES Coordinators shall abide by the following schedule:

SECTION 9. Replacement of Superior and/or Subordinate Raters. — In cases where there are no Superior and/or Subordinate Raters, the following rules shall apply:

A. Superior Raters

 The Superior, who is higher in rank to the immediate superior of the Ratee, and who currently or may have exercised direct or indirect supervision and control over the Ratee in the performance of tasks/functions, for a certain period of time, shall replace the original Superior Rater in undertaking and completing the CESPES.

B. Subordinate Raters

 The remaining Subordinate Raters of the Ratee as identified in the Ratee's RIS shall be engaged and randomly selected to undertake and complete the CESPES:

SUBTITLE IV

Performance Evaluation and Development Planning Stage

SECTION 10. The CESPES Overall Performance Feedback Report. — The CESPES Overall Performance Feedback Report provides a summary of the Ratee's performance ratings and shall be accomplished in accordance with the following rules.

A. The CESB shall generate the CESPES Overall Performance Feedback Report for each Ratee. The said Report shall contain the following:

1. Summary of Ratings — which indicates the PC score; the BC score; the scores on the different BC dimensions; and the overall CESPES Rating, which is the sum of the PC and the BC scores.

2. Adjusted Score — which is the score of the Ratee after it has been subjected to normalization. Normalization is the process of statistically analyzing individual ratings against the group's overall performance.

 In this way, the statistical mean of all ratings shall be used as the basis for determining the "average rating". The process assures the normal distribution of ratings and maintains the rating's relative position from the mean. It is done by taking the following steps:

a. Getting the measures of central tendency (i.e., mean, maximum score, minimum score, and the standard deviation) of the group.

b. Converting the final ratings into Z-scores. The Z-score converts the final score into a score relevant to its distance from the mean.

c. Computing the adjusted score. The adjusted score is obtained by comparing the Z-score with the mean and the maximum score (if the final rating falls above the mean) or minimum score (if the rating falls below the mean). AHcaDC

3. Adjectival Rating — is the qualitative description of the adjusted score based on the following scale:

Outstanding	5.84 — 7.00
Very Satisfactory	4.63 — 5.83
Satisfactory	3.42 — 4.62
Unsatisfactory	2.21 — 3.41
Poor	1.00 — 2.20

4. Summary of data indicated in the CI and AI Form submitted by the Raters.

B. The CESPES Coordinator shall reproduce the said Report for filing and storage in the Ratee's 201 File and forward the original copy to the concerned Ratee.

C. The Ratee and the Superior Rater shall again meet to discuss the said Report with the objective of analyzing the status, issues and factors which have affected the Ratee's performance, as well as formulating strategies and measures to address areas for improvement to improve overall performance.

D. The CESB shall provide the Department Secretary/Head of the Agency with a summary of the performance ratings of all Ratees in the department/agency.

SECTION 11. Computation of Incomplete Ratings of a Ratee. — The following rules shall apply in case of incomplete ratings of a Ratee:

A. The CESB may allow the computation and evaluation of the CESPES ratings of a Ratee who has incomplete ratings, only when the said ratings in question can no longer be obtained due to any or a combination of the following circumstances affecting the source of the ratings:

1. Death;

2. Retirement;

3. Resignation;

4. Approved official leave availed of for a long term;

5. No substitute Raters are available from the Ratee's RIS.

6. All other reasons that will qualify that the ratings can not be obtained, or that the source of the ratings is impossible to reach within the allowable and reasonable duration of time for the conduct of the CESPES.

B. For the BCS Form, the ratings given by the actual Subordinate Raters shall be provided equal percentage weight allocations.

C. For the PC/APC, the Superior Rater may be replaced by the appropriate substitute, as indicated in Rule VI, Subtitle III, Section 9A of these rules.

D. In case of the total absence of Raters (i.e., no Superior and Subordinate Raters are available to rate the Ratee), the Ratee shall make an official request in writing addressed to the CESB for an independent evaluation of his/her work performance and managerial competence for the given Rating Period. The Ratee shall attach to the said request samples of the actual accomplishments, related evidences, and other supporting data to describe and validate the performance targets actually accomplished.

SECTION 12. Multiple Superior Raters. — In case a Ratee has Multiple Superior Raters, the following rules shall apply:

A. Pro-rated percentage weights shall be allocated for each of the performance ratings obtained from each Superior Rater based on the length of the time during which the Ratee is under the direct supervision and control of the specific Rater in the performance of tasks/functions.

B. In the BCS Form, individual performance ratings obtained from each Superior Rater shall be allocated equal percentage weights and averaged to arrive at the Superior BCS Rating.

SECTION 13. Consecutive Positions in a Rating Period. — The following rules shall apply in case a Ratee has consecutively occupied more than one CES position in a given Rating Period:

A. Ratee, who has consecutively occupied more than one CES position of different levels and/or of different departments/ agencies, shall have the corresponding PC and BCS ratings per position occupied in a given Rating Period, provided he/she has been in the said position for at least three (3) months.

B. In the event that a Ratee consecutively occupied more than one CES position of equivalent level in the same department/agency in a given Rating Period, the computation of the PC and BCS rating shall be pro-rated based on the number of months that the Ratee occupied the said position.

RULE VII

Requests, Complaints, Disputes, Anomalies and Irregularities in the CESPES

SECTION 1. Requests, Complaints, Disputes, Anomalies and Irregularities on the CESPES. — The department/agency shall implement policies, guidelines, rules and regulations at the department/agency level to facilitate and support the effective, systematic and proper administration and use of the CESPES. All requests, petitions, complaints, disputes, anomalies and irregularities in the implementation and use of the CESPES shall be referred to, managed, and resolved by the Grievance Committee duly constituted by the department/agency.

SECTION 2. Elevation of the Case to the CESB. — After the department/agency Grievance Committee has decided on the matter, but the Ratee still finds valid and reasonable bases to pursue the same complaint and/or to seek satisfactory resolution of any unresolved issue on the case, he/she may elevate the said case to the CESB.

The Ratee's complaint for CESB's review and resolution of the case must be: 1) officially made in writing and addressed to the CESB within seven (7) calendar days from the Ratee's receipt of the questioned decision; and, 2) accompanied by a certification from the Department/Agency Grievance Committee that the said case has been previously referred to it, with a narration of all actions taken by it and that despite all efforts, it has been unable to arrive at a resolution of the case acceptable to all parties concerned.

SECTION 3. Annulment of the CESPES. — The CESB shall have the authority to annul or declare a failure of the CESPES performance rating process undertaken. The annulment of the CESPES shall include, but not be limited, to the following offenses:

A. Coercion

 Defined as a pre-meditated, purposive and targeted use of physical and/or moral force such as by threat, intimidation, and/or similar acts of duress to compel individuals or groups (e.g., Superior and/or Subordinate Raters) to think and act according to the will of others (e.g., the Ratee);

B. Collusion

 Defined as a conspiracy or agreement by and between individuals and/or groups for an ill-intentioned or deceitful purpose(s), contrary to the purposes, objectives and uses of the CESPES (e.g. predetermined ratings);

C. Tampering

 Defined as the willful altering of the CESPES official forms with the objective of manipulating ratings and/or other given data.

D. Breach of Confidentiality

 Which shall include, but are not limited to, the following acts:

1. Conferring of the Ratee with the Subordinate Raters on matters concerning Ratee's CESPES rating(s) while the Raters are accomplishing the rating forms;

2. Taking a glimpse of or glancing at the rating form accomplished by the Subordinate Raters;

3. Giving undue influence to the Subordinate Raters, in whatever capacity it may be.

E. Such other offenses, which are contrary to the purposes, objectives and uses of the CESPES.

Annulment or declaration of failure of the CESPES shall cause the Ratee involved to have no CESPES rating for the Rating Period, without prejudice to the filing of the appropriate administrative and/or criminal cases against him/her.

SECTION 4. Authority of the CESB. — The CESB shall have the power and authority to:

A. Investigate, review, deliberate and decide on cases referred to it by the department/agency involving requests, petitions, complaints, disputes, anomalies and/or irregularities with regard to the implementation and use of the CESPES. CHTAIc

B. Deputize the department/agency's CESPES Coordinator and/or a representative of the Grievance Committee, or any officer(s) from the concerned department/agency, to conduct investigations and inquiries and to gather, receive and secure evidence, in aid of its review and deliberations.

C. File administrative charges against any person and/or group with proven accountability and/or involvement in any anomaly or irregularity.

SECTION 5. Promulgation of CESB Decision and Recommendation. — The CESB shall render its decision and recommendation on the said case within a period of sixty (60) official working days, after receipt of the complaint.

RULE VIII

Violations

SECTION 1. Violations. — Any violation of any provision in this Resolution shall be dealt with in accordance with existing Civil Service laws, rules and regulations.

RULE IX

Final Provisions

SECTION 1. Separability Clause. — If any section or part of this resolution shall be held to be invalid, the remaining provisions shall be given full force and effect as if the part held invalid had not been included therein.

SECTION 2. Repealing Clause. — All existing CES rules and regulations, circulars and memoranda inconsistent with this resolution are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.

SECTION 3. Effectivity. — This resolution shall take effect fifteen (15) days after publication in a newspaper of general circulation or in the Official Gazette.