The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Energy Management Performance Assessment Results 2011/12 Department of Energy (DoE) 17 October 2012

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation  June 2011 Cabinet approval for annual assessments of management performance of national and provincial departments using MPAT tool  Effective and efficient translation of inputs into outputs through good management practices important for improving service delivery  10 and 15 year reviews identified implementation capacity as key challenge  Develop a culture of continuous improvement and sharing of good practice 2 Background

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation How?  Assessment against 31 management standards in 17 management areas  Standards based on legislation and regulations  Standards developed collaboratively (with National Treasury, DPSA, Office of the Public Service Commission, Office of the Auditor General and Offices of the Premier)  Joint initiative with Offices of the Premier – DPME facilitates national departments, OoP facilitates provincial departments 3

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 4 Self- assessment; validation External moderation and feedback Improve and monitor Senior management agree score Internal Audit certify process and evidence HOD sign off External Moderation DPME/OOP feedback to department Department improvement plan Department monitors Department prepares for next round Have we improved from baseline?

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Moderation  2011/12 assessment results for national departments have been published on the DPME website  Results of the 2011/12 reflect the self-assessment only  DPME only started MPAT assessments in 2011/12 and tested the moderation process in that year  For the 2012/13 assessments DPME will ensure detailed peer moderation of self-assessments, and will publish the moderated results  However, self-assessment results for 2011/12 are still useful because management were generally frank in assessing themselves and because the results provide a picture of management’s own view of its performance and how it needs to improve 5

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation MPAT Compliance ratings 6

7

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Performance Area: Service Delivery Improvement Indicator definition: Whether the department has an approved service delivery charter, standards and service delivery improvement plan and adheres to these to improve services. Question: Which set of statements best reflects the state of the department’s service delivery improvement mechanisms? StatementEvidencePerformance level Department does not have a service charter and service standards.  None required Level 1 Department has a service charter and service standards.  Service charter and Service standards Level 2 Department has a service charter, service standards and SDIP. Department displays its service charter.  Service charter, service standards and SDIP  Display of service charter Level 3 All above in Level 3 plus: Department regularly monitors compliance to service delivery standards and reports on this are considered by top management and used to inform the SDIP. Progress reports against the SDIP are regularly considered by top management.  All above in Level 3 plus:  Minutes of top management meetings  Progress reports and monitoring reports  Stakeholders’ feedback Level 4

9 4.1 Performance Area: Supply Chain Management Indicator name: Acquisition management Indicator definition: Effective and efficient management of entire acquisitions process from initial decision on how to approach the market, to evaluating supplier performance of the contract. Question: Which set of statements best reflects the department’s approach to acquisition management? StatementEvidence Performance level Department does not have a supplier database in place which meets NT minimum requirements.  None required Level 1 Department has a supplier database in place which meets NT minimum requirements.  Supplier database Level 2 Department has a supplier database in place and periodically updates it. Department pays suppliers within 30 days after receipt of a legitimate invoice. Suppliers’ performances are updated on the supplier database and information used in future acquisitions.  Implementation plan  Supplier database  Percentage of Suppliers paid within 30 days  BAS report Level 3 All above in Level 3 plus: Department has a sourcing strategy which reflects assessment of the different procurement methodology options for various categories of spend of the department with a view to choosing the most effective and efficient option for each category. Management monitors payment times and addresses non-compliance with requirement to pay within 30 days. Proper Bid Committee Administration in place. Managers monitor performance of suppliers against the contracts and take remedial actions where necessary.  All above in Level 3 plus:  Updated supplier database  Supplier usage report  Procurement spend reports  Supplier performance review report  Bid Committee appointment letters, signed Codes of Conduct, Bid administration document  Contract management meetings  Minutes of management meetings monitoring 30 day payments  Correspondence with suppliers during contracts Level 4

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 10 MPAT Self-Assessment 2011: DoE

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 11 MPAT Self-Assessment 2011: DoE …/2

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Summary of DoE Self-Assessment results  DoE experienced significant compliance challenges (level 1 or 2) in the standards relating to:  Service delivery improvement  Service delivery charter, standards and SDIP  Human resource management  HR planning  Staff retention  Management of diversity  Implementation of SMS PMDS for HoD  Supply chain management  IT governance framework  SCM demand management  SCM disposal management 12

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Summary of DoE Self-Assessment results …/2  The department is compliant with frameworks (level 3) but needs to do more to be working smartly in the following areas:  Planning  Strategic planning alignment  Annual performance plans  Programme Management  Monitoring and Evaluation  Governance and accountability  Functioning of management structures  Systems and policies to ensure professional ethics  Fraud prevention  Internal Audit arrangements  Risk Management arrangements  Delegations in terms of PSA and PFMA 13

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Summary of DoE Self-Assessment results …/3 Compliant with frameworks (level 3) but needs to do more to be working smartly continued…  Human resource management  Organisational design  Personnel administration systems  Application of recruitment practices  Implementation of SMS PMDS  Management of disciplinary cases  Supply chain management  Logistics management 14

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Summary of DoE Self-Assessment results …/4  The department rated itself as working smartly (level 4) in the following areas  Annual reporting  Functioning of the audit committee  Implementation of level 1-12 PMDS  Functionality of departmental bargaining chamber 15

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Future MPAT Assessments  DPME is in the process of implementing the second round of MPAT  As part of this process, the DoE plans to conduct its next self assessment during October 2012  DPME are available to present the findings of the 2012/13 assessment from February 2013  These assessments will be repeated annually with a view to track improvements  From the 2013/14 financial year onwards, MPAT results will be taken into account in the performance assessment of individual HoDs 17

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Improving management performance  In most management areas some departments have been able to reach level 4  This means that it is possible for all departments to reach level 4  DPME has developed good practice case studies of level 4 performance in various management areas  Case studies will be distributed to departments  Focused workshops on the case studies will be held with departments  Aim is to encourage departments to learn from each other  DPME working with DPSA and NT are offering support targeting specific departments to improve management practices 18

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Limitations of this process  MPAT focuses on processes related to converting inputs into outputs  It does not focus on assessing whether the right outputs are been produced to achieved desired outcomes and impacts  There is a risk that departments may be producing the wrong outputs very efficiently and effectively  In viewing the overall performance of a department it is therefore also important to consider the achievement of outcomes and impacts  DPME is doing this through monitoring of the 12 priority outcomes and related delivery agreements  Departments’ performance against targets for outcome and impact indicators in their strategic plans and APPs should also be used to assess this 19

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Value add of this process  MPAT provides a single holistic picture of the state of a department rather then just focusing on for example financial management  Generally audits focus on compliance only, whereas MPAT focuses on getting managers to work more smartly  Getting all departments to level 4 will improve levels and quality of service delivery  For example getting departments to procure smartly would result in better service delivery by suppliers and contractors, and huge savings from reducing corruption and increasing value for money 20

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Value add… cont  The process of getting top management as a whole to assess itself against a holistic set of good practice management standards and to agree on required improvements is the main value add of the MPAT assessment process  Management practices in departments are generally weak because top management has not paid sufficient attention to improving them  For as long as administrative issues are in a bad state they should be viewed as strategic and top management should pay attention to them  By carrying out annual MPAT assessments the Presidency and the Offices of the Premier are sending out a clear message that improving administration is a priority of government 21

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Ke ya leboga Ke a leboha Ke a leboga Ngiyabonga Ndiyabulela Ngiyathokoza Ngiyabonga Inkomu Ndi khou livhuha Dankie Thank you