MIDTERM REVIEW

1
Ronette Engela PCAS, The Presidency
SMS Conference Performance management 8-9 Sept
2008 GWME system
2
In 2005 Cabinet approved an implementation plan
to develop a monitoring and evaluation system
for use across government
Cabinet memorandum 2005
3 Components 1) Principles 2) Compendium
of indicators 3) Implementation plan Linked
to planning framework
1 Monitoring Evaluation Early
warning Verification Data collection Analysis
Reporting
2 Based on standard, shared indicators
3 Composite system Built over time Pilot Roll-out
Not a single automated IT system
3
Green Book
Well conceptualised, consistent with
international practice

• Composite system that draws its data from
  contributory systems
• Emerging system built up over time with
  consistent and sustained participation by all
  stakeholders

Conceptual anchor matrix of indicators
National vision doesnt just happen at provinces
4
Schematic vision of roll out
2005-2007
2008-?2010
2011 onwards
indicative
Quality improvement and analysis phase
IT systems
Framing phase
Fellowship
Battle
Victory
Quest
5
Status quo
What do we have?

• SYSTEMS Large existing systems in place that have
  taken years to build up
• Performance monitoring system by NT of 500
  indicators of concurrent functions
• Extensive systems in Housing, Education, Health,
  DWAF, SAPS, Soc Dev
• Some provinces FS, GT, WC, KZN EC

• Good CAPACITY and experience
• Conceptual coherence between some core national
  departments, even joint projects

Need to focus on quality improvement
6
GWME System Policy platform
GWME framework
Evaluations
Evaluation policy
Social, Economic Demographic
Statistics Registers and Admin data
SASQAF
Programme Performance Information
Common definitions
PPI framework
7
Status quo
Products and Processes

• Policy platform established 2007
• GWME framework policy platform for ME in SA
  gov
• PPI framework management tool, role of ME in
  plannning and budgeting
• SA Statistical Quality Assurance framework
  evaluation of statistics used by dept
• SAMDI curriculum - ME training secure footing
• Draft DPLG LG framework
• Premiers Office guidelines
• Common definitions document

Revitilized ME Task Team Coordinating Forum
8
Status quo
Products and Processes

• Cross cutting ME products
• PoA annual SONA announces priority programmes
  progress reported to cabinet bi-monthly
• Development Indicators - 76 Indicators progress
  of society
• Public Mang Watch 13x HR indicators, 2
  Financial, 1 audit, weighted to provide composite
  index
• Annual performance plans and service delivery
  targets - 500x indicators - monitored quarterly
• IGR publication of non financial information
• OPSC reports Annual State
• of the Public Service Report
• AG office audits of
• performance information

Learning Network 2 events, 300 att, Web link
9
GWME products
Evaluations
Social, Economic Demographic
Statistics Registers and Admin data
National Indicators
Programme Performance Information
10
GWME products
Evaluations
Social, Economic Demographic
Statistics Registers and Admin data
PERSAL BAS
Programme Performance Information
DPLG DWAF
11
PoA

• Annual State of the Nation priorities are
  announced
• Web based system 300 users
• Bi-monthly report to Cabinet

Positive

• Established the culture of reporting
• Does not allow proper outcome/impact assessment
• Sometimes need process - court cases
• Will be assessed, redesigned end 2008
• Building custom based web system

Negative
12
76 Development Indicators
National Indicators
www.ThePresidency.gov.za
13
(No Transcript)
14
PPI service delivery information
500 indicators

• Annual MTSF informs MTEF - budget
• Together with budget, Annual Performance Plans
  tabled in parl / legislatures
• Prov APP prescribed format with indicators that
  measures delivery of services
• Quarterly reports to provincial Treasuries who
  passes it on to NT
• Published annually
• Monitor Annual Report against APP

8 years to build
15
Education
16
Health
17
Social Development
18
Agriculture
19
Transport
20
Status quo
PoA

• Systems initiated in response to specific needs
• Hard working, but not smart working systems
• Smart analysis to align information

21
Ke ya leboga Ke a leboha Ke a
leboga NgiyabongaNdiyabulela Ngiyathokoza
Ngiyabonga InkomuNdi khou
livhuha Dankie Thank you
22
REPORT FROM WORKSHOP

• Presentation overview of the environment created
  to assist ME to be operational and effective
  i.e. Policy, systems, procedures, products,
  training
• Grappling. Room for improvement. Indicators at
  differing levels possible. Golden thread
  missing. Needs focus to improve quality.
• SMS members need to understand ME. Not a
  compliance matter but an essential management
  tool.

23

• Impact analysis. Difficult to analyse.
• Challenge. Non acceptance of results of ME
  process. Findings negated and not implemented.
  ME needs protection of the HOD. Organisational
  location is important. Enskilling ME
  practitioners. Data interpretation is crucial.
  Know the criteria prior to process.
• Impact assessment differs on what is being
  assessed. Some are long term others medium.

24

• Challenge is what is fair to hold individuals
  accountable for. Indicators need to be carefully
  designed to prevent perverse outcomes.
• International experience should be fully
  utilised.
• Quality improvement needs to be sector specific.
• ME an Art and a Science

25

• ME at this point is more a learning tool than an
  accounting tool.
• Integral part of management.
• Development trajectory for designing
  interventions with a view to ME has a logical
  sequence that should be respected.
• Challenge re Impact How do we allot a cause
  effect process to the programme goals.

26

• Setting performance standards. Organisational
  performance and its relation to individual
  performance how do we get better integration.
  How to identify the key elements that ME will
  focus on. Are we all playing the same game.
• 5 provinces have ME systems. How will best
  practice be distilled to establish a generic
  framework.

27

• ME a management tool. But still a need to
  maintain a level of independence. How to arrive
  at a balance.
• Every dept must have some ME tools to function.
• Must have specific indicators that relate to the
  Developmental State. Persons have a natural
  reluctance to being evaluated. Monitoring is a
  non-negotiable. The 76 are aligned with this.
  When persons are doing badly they are averse to
  monitoring but welcome it when they are doing
  well

28

• Guidelines for requirements of a provincial ME
  system are out. Baseline provided.
• Draft generic ME framework developed. Will be
  shared with departments.
• PMDS needs to articulate with the ME system. Non
  delivery cannot warrant performance bonuses.
• Player/Referee situation. Managers need to
  monitor and also have a specialist component that
  can quality assure performance and for longer
  term programmes independent evaluators could be
  used with the line manager not abrogating role.

29

• Will not have a one on one relationship with
  organisational performance and individual
  performance. It will inform the assessment but
  not decide it.
• Tendency to view the new public service as if it
  has been in existence for 50 years. But this is
  only 13 years old. How can an ME system
  identify causality and influence of architectural
  design, resources, contextual and historical
  realities.

30

• Presupposes that ME infrastructure is in place
  and we just have to implement. The existing
  systems do not lend themselves to Cluster based
  integrated ME beyond a simple aggregation of
  individual depts.
• Must extend the ME system to provide data on
  integrated functioning as a single government
  The architecture is designed for individual
  depts.

31

• Accountability systems focus on department
  alone responsibility. This then limits the
  various systems
• Cluster integration ME would need more focus on
  policy, outcome and output indicators and then
  attempt to allocate accountability for it. No
  simple answer. Will have to develop a shared
  understanding on cluster responsibilities. Must
  go beyond the financial accountability process

32

• Institutional building blockages. How is
  information used to full extent. Sunshine Theory
  galvanises action.
• POA is a source of pressure for Cluster
  Monitoring this could provoke a response ito
  ME
• Pioneering work. Will learn by doing. Walk the
  talk.

33

• Summing up 3 elements ME is everyone's
  business bottom up and top down Cannot avoid
  being accountable
• Find balance between measurement and management
• This is a public service not a public
  corporation. All action must be in service to
  community and meeting its needs.