The Performance-Based Bonus (PBB): Relevance, Improvements ... · PDF fileThe...
Transcript of The Performance-Based Bonus (PBB): Relevance, Improvements ... · PDF fileThe...
The Performance-Based Bonus (PBB):
Relevance, Improvements and Future
Direction
Presented by
Magdalena L Mendoza
DAP/AO 25 Technical Secretariat
October 20, 2016
Outline of Presentation
• Performance Challenges in the Public Sector
• Results-Based Performance Management
• Performance-Based Incentives
• Highlights of Implementation, FY 2012-2015
• Enhanced PBB for FY 2016
• Gains, Lessons and Future Directions
It’s RESULTS that matter
“If you don’t measure results, you can’t tell success from failure
If you can’t see success, you can’t reward it
If you can’t reward success, you’re probably rewarding failure
If you can’t see success, you can’t learn from it
If you can’t recognize failure, you can’t correct it
If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support.
Source: Osborne and Gaebler, 1993
Performance Challenges in the Public Sector
Performance Challenge #1: Results that matter to citizens
Performance Challenge #2: Cascading & aligning goals
GOAL GOAL
Performance Challenge #3: Changing culture and mindsets
Across-the-board incentives
“Skewed” performance evaluation
“Penalty for poor performance is something the bureaucracy is avoiding”
Performance Challenge #4: Monitoring and reporting accomplishments
Office of the President
Oversight Agency
Oversight Agency
Department Attached Agency
Department
Regional Office
Provincial/Field Office
Agency
Inter-Agency Body
Oversight Agency
Oversight Agency
Oversight Agency
Oversight Agency
Oversight Agency
Oversight (branch)
Field Office
Results-Based Performance Management System
Administrative Order No. 25, s.2011
Creation of the Inter-Agency Task Force on the Harmonization of
National Government Performance Monitoring, Information and
Reporting Systems
Executive Order No. 80, s.2012
Adoption of a Performance-Based Incentive System for Government
Employees
Executive Order no. 99, s.2012
Reconstitution of the Office of the Cabinet Secretariat to Cabinet
Secretary
Executive Order no. 201, s.2016
Modification of the Salary Schedule for Civilian Government
Personnel
Legal Bases
Sub-TWG
on Outreach and Change Management
Sub-TWG
on Research and Planning
AO 25 Inter-Agency Task Force
Secretariat
Sub-TWG
on Implementation and Monitoring
• DBM • NEDA
• OP • PMS
• CSC • CESB • COA
• Ombudsman • NCC • GCG
• CHED • LWUA • DILG
• DAP
Partner Agencies
• DOF Principal Agencies
Putting together the system Aligning Societal, Sectoral, Organizational down to Individual Goals
PDP Results
PDP Results
OPIF OPIF
Key Results Areas/Prioritie
s
Balanced perspective
CESPES
Statutory Requirements
SPMS
Probity & Legal Reqts
Performance-Based Bonus (PBB)
– top-up bonus based on delivery
unit’s/individual’s contribution to the
accomplishment of agency targets
Performance-Based Incentive System
PBB
PEI Productivity Enhancement
Incentive (PEI) – across-the-board
bonus of P5,000 per employee
* For FY 2015, the amount of PEI was equivalent of one month basic salary. For FY 2016, the PEI is reverted to P5,000 since the 14th month pay is already granted per Executive Order No. 201, s. 2015.
PBB Criteria and Conditions
Good Governance Conditions
Physical Targets
2012 & 2013
Performance-Based Bonus:
Eligibility Criteria and Conditions
Good Governance Conditions
Physical targets
Transparency Seal, PhilGEPS posting, Citizen’s Charter (ARTA), Report on
CA, SALN (*2013)
KRA targets
MFOs: 3 Strategic Indicators per MFO
STO: 2 most
significant indicators
GASS: 2 most significant indicators, COA FS, Budget
Utilization Rate (*2013)
Transparency Seal, PhilGEPS posting, Citizen’s
Charter (ARTA), SALN
KRAs, OP Planning Tool, EODB targets
STO: QMS milestone or Opn Manual, ISO (*2015)
and 2nd STO indicator
GASS: COA FS, Report on CA, BFARS, BUR, Annual
Procurement Plan, APCPI (*2015)
2014 & 2015
MFOs: All MFO targets based on GAA
Performance Rating and Ranking
Delivery Units
Individuals
FY 2012 FY 2014-FY2015
Rank Distribution
Best 10%
Better 25%
Good 65%
Rank Distribution
Best 10%
Better 25%
Good 65%
Rank Distribution
Good (Better/Best)
Best 10% (15%)
Better 25% (30%)
Good 65% (55%)
FY 2013
Same
Rank Distribution (OPPT/EODB)
Best 10% (15%)
Better 25% (30%)
Good 65% (55%)
Rank Distribution
Best
DU
Better
DU
Good
DU
Best 20% 15% 10%
Better 35% 30% 25%
Good 45% 55% 65%
* Delivery units that did not meet at least 90% of targets are excluded from ranking
* Individuals with less than “Satisfactory” rating excluded from ranking
Interim-PBB for GOCCs under GCG:
Criteria and Conditions
Physical Targets
• Achieve a weighted-average score of at least 90% in its Performance Scorecard
• Certified Quality Management System (QMS) for at least one core process or Operations Manual covering selected core processes or areas of operation
Good Governance Conditions
• GG conditions common to national agencies
• Conditions set by GCG – Payment of applicable taxes
– Time-bound action plans on COA Notice of Disallowances and AOMs
– Manual of Corporate Governance
– Posting of required information in the GOCC website
Interim-PBB Ranking & Rates of Incentives
For Profitable GOCCs
Percentile Multiple of monthly
basic salary
Top – Maximum 10% 2.5
Next – Maximum 25% 1.5
Remaining – Minimum 65%
1.0
For Losing GOCCs
Percentile
Amount (in pesos)
Top – Maximum 10% 25,000
Next – Maximum 25% 15,000
Remaining – Minimum 65%
7,500
Note: Provided, that the total cost of the PBB shall not result in a net loss for CY 2015 computed before subsidy and unrealized gains/losses, and after taxes.
PBB for Local Water Districts:
Criteria and Conditions
Physical Targets
• Achieve at least 90% of each one of its performance targets for the delivery of MFOs, STO, and GASS for the year
• Compliance to PFM reporting requirements of COA and DBM
• Compliance with LWUA reporting requirements
• Adoption and use of the APCPI System
• Submission of APP
Good Governance Conditions
• GG conditions common to national agencies
– Transparency Seal
– PhilGEPS Posting
– Citizen’s Charter
• Payment of applicable taxes
PBB Ranking & Rates of Incentives - LWDs
Performance Category of
Delivery Unit
Individual Personnel
Best Performer (Outstanding)
Better Performer (Very Satisfactory)
Good Performer (Satisfactory)
Best Delivery Unit P35,000
(20%) P20,000
(35%) P10,000
(45%)
Better Delivery Unit
P25,000 (15%)
P13,500 (30%)
P7,000 (55%)
Good Delivery Unit P15,000
(10%) P10,000
(25%) P5,000
(65)
Poor Delivery Unit - - -
The ranking of delivery units shall be based on the average rating of all the Individual Performance Commitment and Review (IPCR) within the delivery units using the Office Performance Commitment and Review (OPCR).
Highlights of Implementation
Initiation Phase
Harmonization Phase
Stabilization Phase
Institutionalization Phase
2012
2013
2014
2015
P
I
E
P
P
I
I
M
M
E
E
Phases of Implementation
2016
Refinement
P
I
M
E
M
Participation Rate
DQ - 21% DQ - 19% DQ - 8% DQ - 12%
FY 2015 Compliance with QMS, APP and APCPI
Compliance with Good Governance Conditions
Number of Disqualified Agencies FY 2012 to FY 2015
FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
DEP’Ts
COs & Others
OEOs
GOCCs covered by DBM
SUCs
TOTAL
0%
14%
38%
27%
21% (41/191)
9%
0%
19%
27%
22%
19% (37/192)
4 % 9%
0%
11%
27%
7%
8% (17/192)
7 %
3%
11 %
7%
20%
12% (36/298)*
* In FY 2015, attached agencies were evaluated separately; 8 agencies with pending assessment
Result of I-PBB for GOCCs under GCG
FY 2013 FY 2014
Total GOCCs Covered
Total Non-PBB-Participating GOCCs
Total PBB-Participating GOCCs
> Approved and Authorized
> Denied Authority to the Grant of IPBB
> GOCCs that No Longer Apply
> GOCCs Unable to Join
124
46
78
62
10
6
0
107
17
90
57
15
4
14
The FY 2015 validation process is still ongoing.
The results of FY 2015 will be available
as soon as the validation process is completed.
FY 2012
125
45
80
46
20
3
11
• Online Monitoring System of Agency Compliance and Performance
Scorecards - http://www.dap.edu.ph/rbpms/agency-performance/
Agency Performance Scorecards
Enhanced PBB
Enhanced PBB beginning FY 2016
Harmonized implementation of the PBB
with EO 201
Priority programs based on the EO 43,
OP Planning Tool, EODB targets shall
be suspended for FY 2016 PBB only
PBB Rates of individuals shall depend
on the performance ranking of the
bureau/delivery unit where they belong.
Third level officials should receive at
least “Satisfactory” rating under the
CESPES
Eligibility Criteria for National Government Agencies
Achieved agency FY 2016 GAA performance
targets
Achieve targets for STO and GASS
Satisfy 100% of good governance conditions
set by AO 25 IATF
Use CSC-approved SPMS in rating First and
Second Level employees and officials holding
managerial and Director positions but are not
presidential appointees
Use CESPES in rating of CES officials and
incumbents of CES positions
Good Governance Conditions for FY 2016
Maintain/Update Transparency Seal (Sec. 99 of
GAA 2016); include FY 2016 APP, ISO QMS
Certification or ISO-aligned QMS documents
Maintain/Update PhilGEPS posting (ALL)
Maintain/Update Citizen’s Charter or its
equivalent, Service Charter
The assessment of agency compliance on GGC and other PBB
requirements shall start on October 1, 2016.
Performance Targets for FY 2016
MFO indicators and targets in the FY 2016 PIB
approved by Congress shall be the basis for
assessing eligibility for the PBB
In addition, agencies must accomplish two STO
targets and common GASS targets
Support to operations:
a. STO target set by Head of Agency
b. Establishment of QMS for at least one core
process certified by any international
certifying body or ISO-aligned
documentation of agency QMS
Performance Targets for FY 2016
GASS targets:
1. Budget Utilization Rate (BUR)
a. Obligations BUR
b. Disbursement BUR
2. PFM reporting requirements of DBM and
COA
a. BFARs
b. Report on Ageing of Cash Advances
c. Mandated financial reports (to COA)
3. Adoption and use of the FY 2015 Agency
Procurement Compliance and Performance
Indicators (APCPI) sytem
4. Submission of Annual Procurement Plan for
FY 2016 based on the approved budget to
the GPPB-TSO
Compliance with APCPI and APP
The APCPI Tool may be downloaded from the GPPB
website: www.gppb.gov.ph/apcpi/apcpi.html
Submit in Excel format AND printed copies on or before
December 1, 2016 to [email protected] or to the
GPPB-TSO front desk
APPs must be approved by HOPE using the format under
the GPPB Circular No.07-2015
Scanned copy of the APP may be sent ot GPPB-TSO;
For purposes of the PBB, the FY 2016 APP should be
submitted within one month from issuance of the PBB
Guideline
Ranking of Delivery Units for FY 2016 PBB
Bureaus, offices or delivery units eligible to the PBB shall be forced ranked
according to the following:
For purposes of PBB, agencies attached to a department or department-
level entity shall be treated as an agency separate from its parent
department and shall have a separate ranking of delivery units
Ranking Performance Category
Top 10% Best Bureau/Office/Delivery Unit
Next 25% Better Bureau/Office/Delivery Unit
Next 65% Good Bureau/Office/Delivery Unit
Ranking of Delivery Units for FY 2016 PBB
Delivery unit is the primary subdivision of a department, agency, GOCC, or
SUC performing substantive line functions, technical services, or
administrative support as reflected in the structure
Type of Government Entity
Department or Department-Level
Agency State Universities and Colleges
GOCCs
Intermediate Level Bureau Level
Delivery Units
Offices Bureaus Services Regional Offices, if any
Offices Bureaus Services Regional/Field Units, if any
Divisions Field Units, if any
Offices Services Campuses Colleges
Offices Departments
Departments/agencies may cluster the delivery units based on similarities of
functions and responsibilities, provided that the overall ranking distribution
for Best and Better delivery units shall not exceed 10% and 25%,
respectively, of the total number of delivery units in the department/agency.
Ranking of Delivery Units
and Rates of Incentives for FY 2016 PBB
PBB rates of individuals shall depend on the performance ranking
of the bureau or delivery unit where they belong
Amount of PBB is based on the individual’s monthly basic salary
as of December 31, 2016
Or Php5,000 PBB if the 50% of monthly basic salary is lower than Php5,000
Performance Category
PBB as % of
Monthly Basic Salary
Best 65%
Better 57.5%
Good 50%
Eligibility of Agency Head
Depends on the eligibility and performance of respective
department/agency
Performance Criteria (Based on MC 2016-1)
PBB as % of
Monthly Basic Salary
Department/agency achieved all GGCs, and
its physical targets in all MFOs, STO and
GASS indicators
65%
Department/agency achieved all GGCs, and
with deficiency in some of its physical target/s
due to uncontrollable factors
57.5%
Department/agency achieved all GGCs, and
with deficiency in one physical target due to
controllable reasons
50%
Eligibility of Individuals (1/4)
Officials and employees of eligible agencies, regular plantilla,
contractual
and casual personnel having an employer-employee relationship.
Salaries are charged to the lump sum appropriation under PS, or
occupying positions in the DBM-approved contractual staffing pattern.
Receive at least a “Satisfactory” rating based on CSC approved SPMS.
Third Level officials should receive at least “Satisfactory” rating under
CESPES. Other officials performing managerial and executive
functions who are not presidential appointees are covered by agency’s
CSC-approved SPMS and should receive at least “Satisfactory”.
Eligibility of Individuals (2/4)
Personnel on detail to another government agency for six
(6) months or more shall be included in the ranking of the
recipient agency. Payment of PBB shall come from the
parent agency.
Personnel who transferred from G2G shall be rated by
the agency where he/she served the longest. If equal
months were served, he/she will be included in the
recipient agency.
Eligibility of Individuals (3/4) Minimum of nine (9) months government service during FY 2016
and with at least “Satisfactory” rating will be eligible to the full PBB
grant.
Minimum of three (3) but less than nine (9) months and with at
least “Satisfactory” rating shall be prorated corresponding to the
length of service.
Length of Service % of PBB Rate
8 months but less than 9 months - 90%
7 months but less than 8 months - 80%
6 months but less than 7 months - 70%
5 months but less than 6 months - 60%
4 months but less than 5 months - 50%
3 months but less than 4 months - 40%
Eligibility of Individuals (4/4)
Being a newly hired employee
Retirement
Resignation
Rehabilitation Leave
Maternity Leave and/or Paternity Leave
Vacation or Sick Leave with or without pay
Scholarship / Study Leave
Sabbatical Leave
Valid reasons for not meeting
the 9-month service requirement
Submission of FY 2015 Financial Reports to COA
Posting of agency System of Ranking delivery units
Submission of Report on Ageing of Cash Advance
Liquidation (with November 15, 2016 as cut-off)
Submission of Form A, A1, and Form 1
Submission of BFARs to COA and DBM
Submission of FY 2015 APCPI Self-Assessment
Submission of FY 2016 APP
Validation of QMS Certification OR the ISO-aligned
QMS documentation
Validation of 2nd STO as identified by head of agency
Timeline for Implementation
On or before March 31, 2016
On or before April 30, 2016 (for Big Agencies)
On or before October 30, 2016
On or before December 1, 2016
On or before January 15, 2017
30 Days or one month after the end
of each quarter
On or before December 1, 2016
For purposes of FY 2016 PBB,
submit within one month
from the issuance of this Guideline
On or before January 15, 2017
On or before January 15, 2017
Submission of Reports
Submit two hard copies and e-copy of Forms A and A1, and other
supporting documents through the AO 25 Secretariat on or before
January 15, 2017
All forms and reports should be signed by the Head of Agency or duly
designated official
COA financial reports and Report on Ageing of Cash Advances to be
submitted directly to COA
DBM financial reports including BFARs shall be submitted directly to
DBM
Submission of Transparency Seal, ARTA and PhilGEPS COC are no
longer necessary. Oversight agencies shall start assessment on
October 1, 2016
The IATF shall conduct spot-checks to validate claims and certifications
made by agencies.
DBM-OCIO
PhilGEPS
CSC
OP, Office of the Ombudsman, CSC
DBM-BMBs concerned
OP-OES
DBM-BMB for Good Governance Sector & OP-OES
GCG
CHED and DBM-Regional Offices
DBM-BMB for Good Governance Sector & LWUA
DBM-BMBs concerned; OP-OES; CHED; LWUA
GQMC
DBM-BMBs concerned
DBM-Regional Offices
DBM
COA
DBM and COA
GPPB-TSO
Transparency Seal
PhilGEPS Posting
Citizen’s Charter
Submission of SALN of employees
Departments
OEOs
GOCCs covered by DBM
GOCCs covered by RA 10149
SUCs
LWDs
STO identified by Agency Head
QMS Certification or
ISO- aligned QMS Documentation
BUR of OEOs, GOCCs covered by DBM, NGAs
BUR of SUCs
Public Financial Management Report
Submission of Financial Statements,
Ageing of Cash Advances Report
BFARs
APCPI and Submission of APP
MFO Physical Accomplishments
STO Accomplishments
GASS
VALIDATING AGENCY PBB REQUIREMENT
Performance-Based Bonus:
Eligibility Assessment
Integrated Performance Assessment by Oversight Agencies
PMS
CHED
OP
CSC
OCS
AO 25 IATF
Departments
COA
Ombudsman
DBM
GPPB-TSO
GQMC CHED GGC LWUA
NCC
DILG
SUCs GOCCs LWDs
Executive Offices
Non-compliance list
NC list
LGU
PhilGEPS
Other Guidelines
• The Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG) issues separate guidelines for covered GOCCs
• The Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) issue separate guidelines for local water districts
• The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the DBM will issue separate guidelines for local government units.
EFFECTS OF NON-COMPLIANCE Agencies unable to comply with all good governance conditions shall be ineligible for PBB FY 2016. After due process by oversight agencies, an agency determined to have committed the following prohibited acts, shall be disqualified from the PBB in the succeeding year.
• Misrepresentation in submitted reports required for the PBB
• Commission of fraud in the payment of the PBB
• Evenly distributing the PBB among employees, violating the policy of paying the PBB based on the ranking of delivery units.
CSC or Ombudsman shall file the appropriate administrative case.
Gains, Lessons and Future Directions
Better understanding of agency roles and mandates
Improvements in quality of performance indicators
High compliance to governance standards
Improvements in management practices
Clear and measurable standards, as well as timely and accurate information, needed
Key Gains & Lessons Learned
Changes in Performance Indicators
• Emphasizing quality over quantity = focusing on the impact of the service
• Cascading of performance targets to delivery units = understanding roles and strategy
• Posting of agency performance scorecards = accountability and transparency
• Linking the bonus to agency and individual performance = fostering teamwork and meritocracy
53
PBB is improving performance
Source: “Republic of the Philippines- Improving Bureaucratic Performance: Assessment of
the Performance-Based Bonus Scheme” (World Bank, DBM & AO25 IATF)
Survey period: September 2013-March 2014
Respondents: Almost 4, 500 employees and officials from 7 national departments
Study on Pay
and Performance in the Philippine Civil
Service
In measuring the effectiveness of PBB to public sector employees, respondents answered:
70% agreed that PBB is a good idea.
PBB promotes team work.
Agency indicators and targets are clearer and
better with PBB.
Internal processes in agencies improved
through the help of PBB.
But …
One area of concern is that some staff in the lower performance categories view the PBB individual
rating process as not transparent
Feedback from Agencies
Q1: The PBB has contributed to the way
we monitor our organizational performance.
Q2: The PBB has contributed to the way
our employees perform.
Q3: The PBB has contributed to the way
we provide our service to the public.
Responses based on 5-point Likert scale:
(5-Strongly Agree, 1-Strongly Disagree)
*216 respondents participated for FY 2014 cycle survey
*356 respondents participated for FY 2015 cycle survey
Average Response
FY 2014 FY 2015
4.36 4.29
4.06 3.96
4.15 4.04
“ PBB reminded us of our
responsibility to the public”
“Performance now has a sense
of accountability”
“Now we have an accurate
reporting and evaluation
system”
“Now there is closer coordination
between delivery units”
“OPIF provided clear objectives and
measurable performance targets which operating units try to accomplish
‘Employees are aware of their performance”
What government employees say about RBPMS and PBIS…
Now we have an easier process of monitoring
programs because of it is more rational and
employees are more goal oriented
Future Directions
• Performance indicators sectoral outcomes
• Harmonization of individual performance evaluation
• Enhanced Performance-Based Bonus
• Using results for capacity development
• “paperless” system
Validation by Oversight Agencies
Final Eligibility
Assessment
Grant of Incentives
Posting of Performance Scorecards
Performance Feedback
Capacity Development
Agency
Reports
Agency
Postings
http://www.dap.edu.ph/rbpms
(02) 400-1469 / (02) 400-1582
(02) 400-1490
facebook.com/PBBSecretariat
twitter.com/PBBSecretariat
0920-498-9121 / (02) 631-2139 http://www.dap.edu.ph/rbpms/policies-issuances
http://www.dap.edu.ph/rbpms/downloads
IATF INFORMATION CHANNELS
THANK YOU.