1. M&E Report: Department of Communications
Presentation of report to the Portfolio Committee on
Communications
25 May 2010

2. Presentation outline
Background and purpose
Presentation of Findings
Way forward

3. Background
The SA Constitution lists 9 basic values and principles that should govern public administration
The PSC’s M & E System looks at the extent to which public service departments comply with these principles

4. Rating System Score description Score %
Excellent performance against all the standards
4,25 – 5,00 %
Good performance against most of the standards
3,25 – 4,00
61% - 80%
Adequate performance against several of the standards
2,25 – 3,00
41% - 60%
Poor performance against most of the standards
1,25 – 2,00
21% - 40%
No performance against all the standards
0,25 - 1,00
0% - 20%

5. Results
Principle
2009/10
Total Score %
Professional Ethics
3,00
60%
Efficiency, Economy and Effectiveness
0,50
10%
Development-Orientated Public Administration
0,00 0%
Impartiality and Fairness
5,00
100%
Public Participation in Policy-making
2,00
40%
Accountability
3,25
65%
Transparency
1,50
30%
Good Human Resource and Career Management
Representivity
1,00
20%
Total out of 45
17.75
39%
Average
1,97
The Department’s average performance is 39%, which is poor performance against most of the standards.

6. Results
Strengths
The Department achieved a performance rating of excellent and good against the following two principles in the 2009/10 evaluation period:
Principle
Performance
Principle 4: Impartiality and Fairness
Excellent performance (100%)
Principle 6: Accountability
Good performance (65%)
Principle 1: Ethics
Adequate performance (60%)

7. Results
Weaknesses
The performance in the remaining six principles varies between no performance and poor performance:
Principle
Performance
Principle 5: Public participation in policy-making
Poor performance (40%)
Principle 7: Transparency
Poor performance (30%)
Principle 8: Good Human Resource Management and Career Development Practices
Principle 9: Representivity
No performance (20%)
Principle 2: Efficiency, economy and effectiveness
No performance (10%)
Principle 3: Development-Oriented Public Administration
No information submitted

8. Recommendations
The PSC made 24 recommendations in this report against the principles as indicated below, that need to be implemented within specific time frames
The PSC will do a follow-up on the progress made with the implementation of these recommendations within six months of delivery of this Report
Principle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Total
Recommendations - 24
% of total 4%
17%
13% 8%
21%
100%

9. Principle 1: Professional Ethics
Score 2009/10: 3,00/5,00 (60%) = Adequate performance against several of the standards
Areas of good practice
The Department developed a policy on the handling of cases of misconduct which is aligned with PSCBC Resolution No. 2 of 1999, as amended
All of the four managers interviewed had a working knowledge of the system on the management of cases of misconduct and its requirements
It takes the Department an average of 13 working days to finalise a case of misconduct. This is within the prescribed working days
Training on the management of cases of misconduct was conducted in the Department.
Areas for improvement
The Department failed to submit evidence of management’s capacity to handle cases of misconduct; and
To prove that management reporting on the finalisation of cases of misconduct takes place

10. Principle 2: Efficiency, Economy and Effectiveness
Score 2009/10: 0,50/5,00 (10%) = No performance
Area of good practice
Under-expenditure constitutes 0.7% of the amount voted during the 2007/08 financial year, which falls within the generally accepted margin of 2% set by National Treasury
Areas for improvement
48% of performance indicators were measurable in terms of quantity and time dimensions.
The Performance Indicators were not always stated in quantifiable terms and the relationship with the output not always clear to the lay reader.
It was also difficult to link the performance reports with the pre-determined outputs, indicators and targets in the strategic plan.
The Department achieved only 2% of its planned outputs within the stipulated timeframes. The low achievement is because no achievement information was provided against 66% of the planned outputs. The performance against these outputs could, therefore, not be validated

11. Principle 3: Development-Oriented Public Administration
Score 2009/10: 0,00/5,00 (0%) = No performance against all the standards
The performance against this principle could not be assessed, because the Department failed to submit the necessary information for assessment despite numerous requests to do so

12. Principle 4: Impartiality and Fairness
Score 2009/10: 5,00/5,00 (100%) = Excellent performance against all the standards
Areas of good practice
All the four sampled decisions were taken in terms of delegation of authority and by duly authorised authority
All decision taken were justified and fair considering the evidence submitted in this regard
All decisions were clearly communicated with adequate notice of the right to appeal or review or request reasons for decisions. Opportunities to make representation before action is taken were given in all the cases

13. Principle 5: Public Participation in Policy-making
Score 2009/10: 2,00/5,00 (40%) = Poor performance against most of the standards
Areas for improvement
The Department does not have a policy/guideline on public participation in place
The Department has a system to obtain inputs in its policy-making process. However, this process should be formalised as a policy document /guideline.
The extent to which public comments are formally responded to could not be assessed. The Department failed to submit the necessary evidence.

14. Principle 6: Accountability
Score 2009/10: 3,25/5,00 (65%) = Good performance agents several of the standards
Areas of good practice
The Department has over the past 15 years received unqualified audits
The Department utilises, amongst others, quarterly reports for monitoring performance. The BAS, Persal and LOGIS transversal systems are utilised to monitor the Department’s finances, personnel and supply chain management.
The Department has a Risk and Fraud Prevention Policy in place. Evidence was provided that risk assessment has been conducted
The Department does have a Fraud Prevention Plan in place which complies with seven (54%) of the 13 requirements set by the PSC’s Transversal M&E System
Area for improvement
The Department does not have sufficient capacity to manage cases of fraud

15. Principle 7: Transparency
Score 2009/10: 1,50/5,00 (30%) = Poor performance against most of the standards
Areas for improvement
The content of the AR covers in sufficient detail 74% of the areas prescribed by National Treasury and the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA), which is less than the standard of 90% set by the PSC’s Transversal M&E System
The Department appointed one officer in writing in terms of section 17 of the PAIA of 2000 with duly delegated authority to deal with request for access to information.
The Department’s draft manual on access to information has not been approved for the past 3 years

16. Principle 8: Good Human Resource Management and Career Development
Score 2009/10: 1,50/5,00 (30%) = Poor performance against most of the standards
Areas of good practice
The Department has a Policy on Recruitment.
The Department has a Workplace Skills Plan for the 2008/09 financial year
Areas for improvement
It takes the Department an average of 31 weeks to fill a vacant post. This is far beyond the standard of 12 weeks (90 days) set by the PSC’s Transversal M&E System
No evidence was provided by the Department that regular management reporting on recruitment is done. This is concerning given the long time it takes to fill vacant posts in the Department
The Workplace Skills Plan is not based on a thorough skills needs analysis
Very little correlation exists between the number of courses planned and the actual courses attended by employees
The impact of courses on service delivery was never assessed

17. Actual at the end of July 2009
Principle 9
Score 2009/10: 1,00/5,00 (20%) = No performance against most of the standards
Areas for improvement
The Department’s draft Employment Equity Policy and Plan do not fully comply with the requirements of Sections 1 and 20 of the Employment Equity Act
66% of the national representivity targets have been met as follows:
Management reporting on representivity is done, but the reports do not have clear time frames and remedial steps to improve representivity in the Department
The Department has implemented only two (or 9%) of the 23 good diversity measures suggested by the PSC’s M&E system
Reprensentivity target
Actual at the end of July 2009
75% senior management
84%
50% Women at SMS
47%
2% people with disabilities 2%

18. Way forward
The Department is expected to implement recommendations within the set timeframes
The PSC will engage the Department to assess the extent to which the recommendations have been implemented
Report forms part of SOPS and consolidated reports that are submitted to Parliament

19. We will take questions for clarity
Conclusion
Thank you
We will take questions for clarity