05 April 2016 Briefing to the Portfolio Committee on review of the draft 2016-17 APP - Department of Arts and Culture

Reputation promise/mission The Auditor-General of South Africa has a constitutional mandate and, as the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) of South Africa, it exists to strengthen our country’s democracy by enabling oversight, accountability and governance in the public sector through auditing, thereby building public confidence.

Purpose of the briefing To provide the portfolio committee (PC) with audit insights on the interim review of the department’s draft annual performance plan (APP) in order to add value to oversight.

Key committee considerations when reviewing the APP Does the APP align with MTSF? Are indicators relevant and complete? Is there a logical link between objectives, indicators and targets? Are the targets realistic i.e. SMART? Are adequate resources (human and financial) available to achieve APPs? How can the APP be achieved e.g. Performance contracts/ monitoring Review quarterly progress against APP targets Review annual achievement against APP targets Review and track changes to strategic plans and annual performance reports. Are the Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans aligned to the Medium-Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) outcomes and priorities? Are indicators relevant to the institution’s mandate and the realisation of strategic goals and objectives? Does the APP include a complete set of indicators that is relevant to the objectives that need to be achieved e.g. are all customised sector indicators relevant to the institution included in the APP? Is there a logical link between objectives, indicators and targets? Are the targets realistic (can it be done)? Does the institution have adequate resources (human and financial) available to achieve predetermined objectives? How is the institution ensuring that Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans will be achieved (performance contracts, quarterly monitoring, etc.) The Portfolio committee should review the quarterly progress of institution with regard to predetermined objectives and contributions to the MTSF. The Portfolio committee should review annual achievement of predetermined objectives by institutions (Annual Reports) The Portfolio committee should approve and track changes to strategic plans and annual performance reports.

Review process Reporting AGSA review of the draft 2016-17 APP Assessed the process followed by departments to prepare and submit strategic plans (if relevant) and APPs. Assessed the measurability and relevance of the final draft indicators and targets planned for selected programmes Reporting Findings from the review are communicated in the 2015-16 interim management report to enable changes to be made. Findings relevant to the interim review do not have an impact on the audit conclusion on usefulness or reliability of the selected programmes for the PFMA 2015-16 year end audit.

Criteria used to assess the draft APP Measurability of indicators and targets Indicators are well-defined Indicators are verifiable Targets are specific, measurable and time-bound. Relevance of indicators and targets Indicators and targets are relevant to the mandate and realisation of strategic goals and objectives. 1. For indicators to measurable, they must be: Well-defined i.e. clear, unambiguous definition so that data will be collected consistently and will be easy to understand and use. Verifiable i.e. it must be possible to validate the processes and systems. 2. For targets to be measurable, they must be: Specific i.e. the nature and the required level of performance can be clearly identified Measurable: the required performance can be measured Time bound: the time period or deadline for delivery is specified 3. For indicators to be relevant i.e. the indicator must relate logically and directly to an aspect of the institution's mandate, and the realisation of strategic goals and objectives.

a Review findings on draft 2016/17 APP The following programmes were selected for the review : Programme 3 : Arts & Culture Promotion and Development The programme is responsible for the development and promotion of arts, culture and language. Programme 4 : Heritage Promotion & Preservation The programme is responsible to identify, collect, safeguard, promote and transform South African heritage, archives, heraldry and libraries. The overall results are as follows : Auditee  Measurability Relevance Department of Arts and Culture X a Use slide if interim review was performed and findings were raised. Specific Measurable Timebound Measurability of targets Well defined Verifiable Measurability of indicators Indicators are relevant to mandate and realisation of goals. Relevance

Summary of key findings Note : Review was done on the 2nd draft APP which was issued to auditors on 02 December 2015 and was compared to the final version of the APP which was submitted on 26 February 2016. Indicators not well defined . Programme No of total indicators in the APP No of indicators not well defined No of indicators corrected as per APP 19 /26 February 2016 Percentage % Programme 3 27 6 22 % Programme 4 29 10 35 %

Summary of key findings 2. Targets not specific Programme No of total indicators in the APP No of Targets not Specific No of Targets corrected as per APP 19 /26 February 2016 Percentage % Programme 3 27 14 51 % Programme 4 29 6 21 %

Summary of key findings 3. Targets not measurable Programme No of total indicators in the APP No of targets not measurable No of targets corrected as per APP 19 /26 February 2016 Percentage % Programme 3 27 1 4 % Programme 4 29 3 10 % 4. Discrepancies between the annual and quarterly targets.

The following serves as examples : Indicators not well defined Indicator detail Target Auditor’s comments Number of hand held flags distributed 10 000 The TID (technical indicator description) does not specify where and how the hand held flags will be distributed. e.g. Flags will be distributed in the national days, minister’s imbizos or on request from other government departments. Number of artists placed in schools and number of schools where the AiS programme is implemented 340 artists placed in schools 300 schools hosting Artists in Schools The TID does not specify the role of artists in schools. e.g. Providing support to teachers or extra mural activities to leaners or teaching related A & C subjects. The annual targets have been planned in each quarter and therefore there are inconsistencies between the annual and quarterly targets Analysis of findings per programme – indicating findings relevant to measurability and relevance per indicator and target. Auditors will use this to highlight important review findings from the interim review.

Targets not specific and measurable Indicator detail Target Auditor’s comments Percentage of accepted file plans evaluated 100% (of estimated 56)  The target is not specific and measurable as the TID does not specify how the required performance will be calculated. e.g. 100% = 56,what if more or less than 56 files plans are evaluated, how is will this be reported? Number of programmes supported to support local content 1 new Community arts centre initiated The target is not specific and measurable as the TID does not specify the following : (1) area where the centre will be built (2) It is also not specified how the quarterly targets of 20%,40%,60% and 80% will be calculated. Analysis of findings per programme – indicating findings relevant to measurability and relevance per indicator and target. Auditors will use this to highlight important review findings from the interim review.

QUESTIONS