REVENUE MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 26-2013 issued on October 1, 2013 establishes the BIR Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS), which aims to strengthen the culture of performance and accountability in the BIR. BIR SPMS shall follow the four-stage Performance Management System (PMS) cycle, namely: performance planning and commitment; performance monitoring and coaching; performance review and evaluation; and performance rewarding and development planning. The system puts premium on major final outputs that contributes to the realization of organizational mandate, mission/vision, strategic priorities, outputs and outcomes. Accountabilities and individual roles in the achievement of organizational goals are clearly defined to give way to collective goal setting and performance rating. The individual’s work plan or commitment and rating form is linked to the division/unit/office work plan or commitment and rating form to establish clear linkage between organizational performance. The BIR SPMS shall establish the formation and operation of the BIR Performance Management Team (BIR PMT) in the National and Regional Offices. The team shall validate the outstanding performance ratings and may recommend concerned employees for performancebased awards. Grant of performance-based incentives shall be based on the final ratings of employees as approved by the Head of Office. Performance ratings shall be used as basis for promotion, training and scholarship grants and other personnel actions. Employees with Outstanding and Very Satisfactory performance ratings shall be considered for the said personnel actions and other related matters. Officials and employees who shall be on official travel, approved leave of absence or training or scholarship programs and who have already met the required minimum rating period of 90 days shall submit their performance commitment and rating report before they leave the office. For purposes of performance-based incentives, said employees shall use their performance ratings obtained in the immediately preceding rating period. Employees who are on detail or secondment to another office/project on a full time basis shall be rated in their present or actual office by their project supervisors, copy furnished their mother office. Project supervisors, on the other hand, shall be rated by the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner who directly oversee the implementation of the project. Employees who will retire but met the required minimum rating period shall submit their accomplished performance ratings within the prescribed period to be entitled to payment of performance-based incentives. Security of tenure of those holding permanent appointments is not absolute but based on performance. If after advice and provision of developmental intervention, an employee still obtains Unsatisfactory rating in the immediately succeeding rating period, he/she may be dropped from the rolls by the Head of Office thru a written notice/advice at least 3 months before the end of the rating period. Officials and employees with below Satisfactory rating either on the 1st semester or 2nd semester or both shall not be entitled to receive performance-based incentives. No performancebased incentives shall be given to employees who failed to submit their final performance ratings. The concerned officials/offices who are key players in the establishment and implementation of the BIR SPMS are specified in the Order, together with their corresponding responsibilities. The guidelines in the four-stage PMS cycle are also specified in the Order, the highlights of which are the following: a. Performance Planning and Commitment – during this stage, success indicators are determined. Success indicators are performance level yardstick consisting of performance measure and performance targets. Performance measures need not be many. Only those that contribute or support the outcomes that the Agency aims to achieve shall be included in the office performance contract, i.e., measures that are relevant to Agency’s core functions and strategic priorities. Performance measures shall include any one, combination of, or all of the following general categories, whichever is applicable: effectiveness/quality; efficiency and timeliness. b. Performance Monitoring and Coaching – supervisors and coaches play a critical role at this stage. Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms should be in place to ensure that timely and appropriate steps can be taken to keep a program on track and that its objectives or goals are met in the most effective manner. c. Performance Review and Evaluation – the average of all individual performance assessment shall not go higher than the collective performance assessment of the Office. Any issue/appeal/protest on the Office assessment shall be articulated by the concerned Head of Office and decided by the Commissioner during the agency performance review conference. Hence, the final rating shall no longer be appealable/contestable after the conference. The immediate supervisor shall assess individual employee performance based on the commitments made at the beginning of the rating period. The performance rating shall be based solely on records of accomplishment; hence, there is no need for self-rating. The BIR SPMS puts premium on major final outputs towards realization of organizational mission/vision. Hence, rating for planned and/or intervening tasks shall always be supported by reports, documents or any outputs as proof of actual performance. In the absence of said bases of proofs, a particular task shall not be rated and shall be disregarded. The Head of Office/Division Chief/RDO shall determine the final assessment of performance level of the individual employees in his/her Office based on proof of performance. d. Performance Rewarding and Development Planning – part of the individual employee’s evaluation is the competency assessment vis-à-vis the competency requirements of the job. The result of the assessment shall be discussed by the Head of Office/Division Chief/RDO and supervisors with the individual employee at the end of each rating period. The result of the competency assessment shall be treated independently of the performance rating of the employee. Employees who feel aggrieved or dissatisfied with their final performance ratings can file an appeal with the BIR PMT within 10 days from the date of receipt of notice on their final performance evaluation rating from the Head of Office. An office/unit or individual employee, however, shall not be allowed to protest the performance ratings of other office/unit or 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. The PMT shall decide on the appeals within one month from receipt. The decision of the National Office PMT may be appealed to the Commissioner. Officials or employees who are separated from the service on the basis of Unsatisfactory or Poor performance rating can appeal their separation to the Civil Service Commission or its Regional Office within 15 days from receipt of the order or notice of separation.