Monitoring and Evaluation in the Public Service

1
Monitoring and Evaluation in the Public Service

• Learning Network Session Transforming the Public
  service for service excellence
• 24 February 2006

2
Presentation outline

• Historical background to ME in SA
• ME and democracy
• ME Transparency, Accountability and Efficiency
• The Government-wide ME system
• Using ME to transforming the Public Service for
  service excellence
• Challenges in implementing ME

3
1. Historical background to ME in SA

• ME introduced in SA post-1994 prior to that
  the pre-conditions for ME did not exist
  (transparent and accountable context)
• Initially Donor driven Donor agenda
• Impetus from SONA (2004, 2005) must improve
  ME capacity
• PSC mandated to ME implemented the PS ME
  system, HOD eval, programme eval, Batho Pele
  Surveys etc, culture establishmed

4

• Legislative changes necessitated ME PAJA,
  PAIA, Batho Pele audits vibrant media and civil
  society, strong demand factors
• Programme of Action on Gov Website allows the
  public to ME govn
• AFrEA (African Evaluation Association Conference,
  2004, launch of SA ME Association, 2005 etc)

5
2. ME and democracy

• Reciprocal relationship between effective ME and
  democracy (same preconditions transparency,
  accountability)
• ME in government contributed to improved
  democracies in Africa (AFREA)
• ME improves public participation, as state
  performance is thrown open for scrutiny

6
3.ME 9 Constitutional Principles for Public
Admin.

• The State of the Public Service Reports of the
  PSC, 2000 to present, provide an evaluative
  commentary of the PS, against the 9 Constit.
  Princples for Public Admin.
• If departments adhere to these principles, public
  admin. improves

7
4. Government-wide ME System

• Driven by the Presidency, sets a framework for
  ME in SA, draws on existing transversal systems
  Treasury (Value for Money), PSC (Governance),
  DPSA (HR and early warning systems), DPLG
  (Service delivery)
• Provides the framework for depts to set up their
  own ME systems
• Strives towards a dashboard of indicators to
  answer performance questions across any parameter

8
5. Using ME to transform PS for service
excellence

• ME focuses attention on performance areas what
  gets measures gets done
• Transform public service from being unresponsive,
  bureaucratic etc to being people centred
• ME systems must prioritise what gets measured,
  as it gets done.
• If key areas are ME transformation is
  supported
• Good reporting systems are required

9
6. Challenges in implementing ME

• Tends to be resistance, seen as policing it is
  both programme improvement and learning and
  accountability
• Requires champions political and
  administrative, largely a political project with
  a technical dimension
• Do not assume systems will solve ME, needs to be
  a culture of ME

10

• ME takes time, must be a strategy, and buy-in
  (high risk for sabotage)
• Ensure ME capacity is built, dangerous to have
  poorly qualified ME personnel doing ME, could
  result in antagonism and loss of confidence in
  the system
• Learn from how current systems work, and
  customise to local conditions

11

• The programme logic model

Overall Results Better governance and service
delivery in South Africa
Problems are addressed
Learning from good practice examples takes place
Departments focus on priority areas
Achievements are affirmed and promoted
FOLLOW UP
Problem areas are identified
Good practice by others is identified and promoted
Priority areas in public admin are communicated
Departments reflect on their own performance
REPORTING
Public Service Monitoring
12
The PS ME SystemContinued

• PRINCIPLE-INDICATOR
• 1. Professional ethics
• - a high standard of professional ethics must
  be maintained
• Criteria cases of misconduct are dealt with
  effectively and promptly
• Standards
• A procedure is in place for reporting,

13
The PS ME System.Continued

• Recording and managing misconduct cases
• - Cases responded to promptly and finalised
• Department has adequate capacity to handle
  misconduct cases
• Underlying assumptions Departments that deal
  with cases of misconduct effectively -
  generally maintaining a higher standard of ethics
  that those that do not

14
The PS ME systemContinued

• Policy
• Public Service Coordinating Bargaining
  Resolution 2 of 1999
• Research overview
• evidence based, management reports, snap
  surveys, recent cases (hearings), source
  documents policy, presal function 4.12, cases
  files, summary tables of depts

15
The PS ME SystemContinued

• Management reports, independent assessments if
  available, interviews with key managers.
• RATINGS
• Maximum Score 5
• for attributes 1 is given, and then added, which
  shows quality of performance

16
The PS ME SystemContinued

• - a policy is in place
• more than half of the managers have working
  knowledge of the system
• (1)
• Misconduct cases are reported upon in management
  reports
• Evidence on managements response/action on these
  reports is available
• (1)

17
The PS ME System.Continued

• - the length of time taken to process cases is
  acceptable and with fair effective limits
• - (Show evidence that met req. of PSCBC, 2 of
  1999)
• (1)
• - sufficient staff is allocated to handle the
  number of cases encountered
• (1)

18
The PS ME SystemContinued

• Misconduct is reflected in training materials and
  is covered in capacity building processes
• (1)

19
The PS ME SystemContinue

• EFFICIENCY, ECONOMY AND EFFECTIVENESS
• Context/constitutional value
• Efficient, economic and effective use of
  resources must be promoted
• Criteria/Performance indicator
• Expenditure is according to budget
• programme objectives are achieved

20
The PS ME SystemContinued

• Standards
• Expenditure is budgeted
• Programmes are implemented as planned or changes
  to implementation are reasonably explained
• Underlying assumptions
• If funds are spent according to budgets and
  objectives achieved, such departments are better
  that those that over/under spend, and are late in
  implementing their projects.

21
The PS ME SystemContinued

• Policies
• Treasury Regulation, Pt. 3 Planning and
  Budgeting
• Public Service regulations, Part 111/b
• Treasury Guidelines for preparing budget
  submissions, 2002
• Treasury Guide for the Preparation of Annual
  reports of departments

22
The PS ME SystemContinued

• Principle 3 Development-oriented
• Context/Constitutional value
• Public administration must be development-oriente
  d
• Criteria/performance indicator
• the department effectively implements
  development programmes that aim to alleviate
  poverty

23
The PS ME SystemContinued

• 4. Impartial and fair
• Criteria/Performance indicator
• The department is making a concerted effort to
  move towards compliance of the Administrative
  Justice Act (AJA)
• 5.Public participation
• Criteria/performance indicator
• The department facilitates public participation
  in policy-making

24
The PS ME SystemContinued

• 6. Accountability
• Criteria/Performance indicator
• Adequate internal control is exerted over all
  departmental financial transactions
• Fraud prevention plans, based on thorough risk
  assessments, are in place and are implemented.

25
The PS ME SystemContinued

• 7. Transparency
• Criteria/Performance indicators
• The departmental annual report meets the
  required standards and thereby facilitates
  transparency

26
The PS ME SystemContinued

• 8 .Good Human Resource management practices
• Criteria/performance indicators
• A. recruitment
• vacant posts are filled in a timely and
  effective manner
• B. Skills development
• The Department complies with the provisions of
  the Skills development Act