Overview presentation on the work of DPME The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) Overview presentation on the work of DPME Dr Sean Phillips Director-General: DPME

The Presidency PRESIDENT DEPUTY PRESIDENT MINISTER : Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation DEPUTY MINISTER Director General : The Presidency DPME Stats SA NYDA Secretariat : NPC

Funding flow National Treasury Presidency DPME Stats SA NPC NYDA

Introduction DPME has a budget of approximately R200m and approximately 200 staff DPME therefore has to be strategic with its M&E work, to make best use of its resources We have partnered with the Offices of the Premier for implementation of PME programmes, and have collaborated closely with National Treasury, DPSA and the Office of the Auditor General We have been careful not to further overload departments and municipalities with reporting requirements, and as far as possible we draw on existing data and reports All of our M&E programmes are implemented in such a way as to build the capacity of departments and municipalities to monitor and evaluate their own work, and to develop a culture of continuous improvement In general, the results of our M&E programmes are made public M&E has been part of the public service reform and modernisation process internationally for several decades, but more recently Performance M&E has been pursued in a number of countries, with an emphasis on using M&E to improve delivery and impacts on citizens

Focus of DPME to date M&E of national priorities Management performance M&E M&E of front-line service delivery Government-Wide M&E System Plans for the 14 priority outcomes (delivery agreements) MTSF Monitoring (ie tracking) progress against the plans Evaluating to see how to improve programmes, policies, plans (2012-13 8 evaluations, then 10-15 per year) Monitoring of experience of citizens when obtaining services (joint with provinces), including citizen-based monitoring Presidential Hotline – analysing responses and follow-up Assessing quality of management practices in individual departments (MPAT) at all levels of government Moderated self assessment and continuous improvement Guidelines for M&E across government Data quality Capacity development Programme planning guidelines National Evaluation System Custodian of strategic and annual performance planning To date my Department has been focused on three levels of performance monitoring and evaluation. At the highest level, our focus since 2010 has been on facilitating the development of plans for priorities such as basic education, health, reducing crime and creating employment. The main aims of this initiative have been to increase the strategic focus of government, to introduce results-based planning on a sectoral basis, to increase coordination between departments and across spheres of government, and to use M&E of progress against the plans to foster a culture of evidence-based continuous improvement. The 10 and 15 year reviews of the post-apartheid government’s performance which were carried out by the Presidency came to the conclusion that a key challenge in SA is implementation of policies, which in turn is related to management weaknesses. At the next level we have therefore introduced a management performance assessment mechanism, informed by the Canadian Management Assessment Framework. The methodology is based on self assessment against standards in key management areas, coupled with verification against secondary data. It is being implemented in partnership with the provinces and the results of the assessments will be presented to Cabinet and the Provincial Executive Councils on an ongoing basis, together with monitoring reports on the implementation of improvement plans. A key political imperative in South Africa is to improve the quality of services provided directly to citizens. We are therefore also carrying out M&E at the level of frontline service delivery by visiting service delivery sites together with the Offices of the Premier in the provinces. The focus is on whether service delivery standards are in place and are being adhered to. The results and monitoring reports on the implementation of improvement plans are similarly presented to Cabinet and the Provincial Executive Councils. We have also introduced a Presidential Hotline through which the public can lodge service delivery complaints. In future we would like to introduce more citizen-based monitoring, in partnership with civil society organisations.

Planning and M&E for priority outcomes Performance agreements between President and Ministers Cross-departmental and inter-sphere plans (delivery agreements) Results based: logic chain / theory of change with indicators and targets from activities to outcomes Close links with budgeting process Coordinated by cross-government Implementation Forums (including provinces where appropriate) Quarterly monitoring reports to Cabinet (traffic lights) by coordinating Ministers Progress reports to Cabinet from DPME Public progress reporting through Programme of Action website Mid-term Review and 20 YR – identifying successes and challenges MTSF for 2014-2019 period, increased to 14 outcomes, link to departmental strategic plans and APPs

National evaluation system Deep assessments of the design, efficiency, effectiveness, implementation or impact of programmes, and for identification of improvements National evaluation policy framework Focus on evaluation of programmes related to strategic priorities through 3 year rolling national and provincial evaluation plans 38 evaluations completed or underway, 8 completed, 6 more completing in the next month 2 provinces and 3 departments have evaluation plans, working to extend this Departments encouraged to undertake other evaluations, in addition to those in the national and provincial evaluation plans Evaluations in national evaluation plan go to Cabinet Evaluation reports also sent to the relevant Portfolio Committees in Parliament Independent quality assessment Departments must put in place improvement plans based on evaluations in National Evaluation Plan, monitored by DPME

Monitoring management performance Monitoring management practices in all national and provincial government departments (Management Performance Assessment Tool – MPAT) Aim is to assist departments to improve the quality of their management practices Joint initiative with Offices of the Premier Standards developed collaboratively with policy departments and provinces Standards based on legislation and regulations Assessment against 31 management standards Self assessment with moderation Support offered to departments to develop and implement improvement plans to address key areas of weakness Case studies of good practice developed and disseminated Carried out annually, so far for 3 cycles, all national and provincial departments participated in last two cycles Now starting to monitor at municipal level as well, using a similar tool (LGMIM)

Front-line service delivery monitoring Unannounced visits to front line services eg police stations, clinics, home affairs offices, social grant offices Joint programme between DPME and provinces Interview citizens, front-line staff and management Focus on service standards, queues, attitude of staff, cleanliness of facilities, etc Approximately 400 sites visited over last two years - not “scientific” as not random sampling etc, indicative Reports sent to facilities and management, Cabinet If 3/7 red lights then repeat visit Presidential Hotline over 190 000 calls received, 94% resolved, customer satisfaction surveys also being carried out Piloting system of citizen-based monitoring

Other DPME work Recent development: functional collaboration with National Treasury to manage the strategic planning and annual performance planning and associated quarterly and annual report system – capacity being put in place in DPME to manage this Monitoring a range of indicators of departmental performance for FOSAD (e.g. payment of suppliers within 30 days with National Treasury) New programme to assist departments to improve their operations management Operation Phakisa: detailed planning and rigorous monitoring in specific priority areas – e.g. oceans economy Support the President with Siyahlola Programme Support to IMC for human settlements for mining towns Development Indicators Mid-term Review and 20 Year Review

Collaboration with Parliament DPME previously reported to SCOA Undertook two study tours on PME, to USA/Canada and Kenya/Uganda with SCOA It is suggested that a 2 day workshop be arranged for DPME to present its programmes in more detail to the Public Service Committee DPME has been collaborating with the Office of the Speaker w.r.t. training of MPs in M&E Presentations have been made to the Committee of Chairs of Committees DPME is often called to Portfolio Committees to present the results of its M&E work DPME would like to further build its relationship with Parliament to enable Parliament to use the information which DPME produces to support its oversight role

Budget

DPME Budget and Expenditure Summary   11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 Allocation 96 202 174 159 192 745 208 164 219 672 232 660 % Increase - 81.0% 10.7% 8.0% 5.5% 5.9% Expenditure 92 841 160 236 191 727 % Spent 96.5% 92.0% 99.5%

Spent 99.5%

Share of budget per implementation programme Funding for the majority of policy programmes decline, in real terms, over the MTEF Only real increase is in Local Government Unit from13/14 to 14/15 Citizen Based Monitoring under FSDM from 15/16 to 16/17

Budget per economic classification Real decrease in budget available for Goods and Services and for Capital Expenditure Increase in compensation in 2013/14 due to implementation of res. 1 of 2012 re. Salary levels 9/10 and 11/12 Increase in Compensation from 13/14 to 14/15 due to additional posts for Local Government Unit and Evaluations Increases in Compensation from 14/15 onwards for cost of living adjustments only

Summary of audit outcomes 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Part of Presidency Unqualified audit Findings related to ineffective internal controls and non-compliance with legislation / procedures, mostly related to performance information and supply chain management Clean Audit Audit in progress

MTEF Constraints Limitations due to funding constraints : Number of staff which can be employed is limited Number of evaluations of major and strategic government programmes is limited Only able to assess municipal management performance in 25 municipalities per annum Number of frontline service delivery sites which can be monitored is limited Number of sites for Citizen Based Monitoring programme is also limited Some shortfalls can be covered during 14/15 by donor funding. Limited donor funding available after that. DFID ends next year. Most of CIDA spending in 13/14 and 14/15.

Examples of DPME documents Development Indicators (produced annually) Mid-term Review and 20 Year Review Citizen-based Monitoring Framework Improving Government Performance: Our Approach Policy Framework for the Government-wide M&E system Good Practice Guide for the Role of the Offices of the Premier in M&E National Evaluation Policy Framework and various guidelines on evaluation Guide for M&E components in national government departments Municipal assessment tool guideline Guideline to the Outcomes Approach and associated practice notes MPAT framework and MPAT guide

THANK YOU See the DPME website: www.thepresidency-dpme.gov.za for a range of documents on DPME programmes as well as guidelines for M&E