1. Kzn Municipal Performance ANALYSIS
Clive Coetzee
General Manager: Infrastructure Management and Economic Services
KZN Provincial Treasury

2. INTRODUCTION
This analysis form the basis of a comprehensive and elaborate system of monitoring performance of municipalities. The system is designed to continuously monitor the financial performance of municipalities. Central to the system is the development of key performance indicators as instruments to assess performance.

3. INTRODUCTION
Histogram = graphical representation showing a visual impression of the distribution of data
Table – 2003/4 Histogram compared to 2009/10 Histogram
Values in Red indicate the highest Percentage score
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 23
37.70%
(7.5%) 8
50.82% 12
70.49%
83.61%
96.72% 1
98.36%
More
100.00%
Cumulative number of observations in all of the bins up to the specified bin
Discrete intervals (bin) = Percentage
Number of Observations per interval (bin) = 61 municipalities

4. INTRODUCTION Graph = Displays 4 performance measures
Improve/ Deteriorated in Average Municipal Standard = If 2003/4 Score <> 2009/10 Score then Improved/Deteriorated
Average Municipal Standard Better/Worse than Average Total Standard = If Average Municipal Standard Score <> Average Total Standard Score then Better/Worse
Individual Municipalities
All the Municipalities, n=61

5. INTRODUCTION Graph = Displays 4 performance measures
Difference in Average Municipal Standard Better/Worse than Difference in Total Standard = If Difference in Average Municipal Standard Score <> Difference in Average Total Standard Score then Better/Worse
% Total Performance in Average Municipal Standard = Average Score of the above three (3) performance measures for each municipality

6. REVENUE

7. Property rates as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 23
37.70% 8
50.82% 12
70.49%
83.61%
96.72% 1
98.36%
More
100.00%
Average: 11
18.03% 24
57.38%
75.41% 9
90.16% 3
95.08%
Percent of Total Revenue derived from Property Rates – 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

8. Property rates as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)

9. Service charges as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 12
19.67% 16
45.90% 10
62.30% 5
70.49%
78.69% 7
90.16% 4
96.72%
More 2
100.00%
Average: 11
18.03% 24
57.38%
73.77% 6
83.61%
Percent of Total Revenue derived from Service Charges– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

10. Service charges as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)

11. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
Government grants as a % of total revenue) (SMALLER is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 1
1.64% 15
26.23% 9
40.98% 12
60.66% 2
63.93% 6
73.77% 11
91.80%
More 5
100.00%
Average:
0.00% 4
6.56%
24.59%
34.43%
52.46% 16
78.69%
96.72%
Percent of Total Revenue derived from Government Grants– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

12. Government grants as a % of total revenue) (SMALLER is Better)

13. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
External loans as a % of total revenue(Bigger is Better
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 54
88.52% 1
90.16%
91.80% 2
95.08%
96.72%
98.36%
More
100.00%
Average: 55
93.44%
Percent of Total Revenue derived from Loans– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

14. External loans as a % of total revenue(Bigger is Better

15. expenditure

16. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
Employee costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 1
1.64% 5
9.84% 12
29.51% 23
67.21% 10
83.61% 6
93.44% 2
96.72%
More
100.00%
Average:
0.00% 9
14.75% 32 16 4
Percent of Total Expenditure on Employee Costs– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

17. Employee costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)

18. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
Repairs & Maintenance costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 2
3.28% 29
50.82% 16
77.05% 9
91.80% 3
96.72% 1
98.36%
More
100.00%
Average:
0.00% 37
60.66% 19
Percent of Total Expenditure on Repairs & Maintenance Costs– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

19. Repairs & Maintenance costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)

20. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
Materials & Bulk purchases costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 34
55.74% 6
65.57% 5
73.77% 4
80.33% 7
91.80% 3
96.72% 1
98.36%
More
100.00%
Average: 31
50.82%
60.66% 11
78.69% 8 2
Percent of Total Expenditure on Materials & Bulk Purchases Costs– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

21. Materials & Bulk purchases costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)

22. Electricity costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 46
75.41% 2
78.69% 5
86.89% 1
88.52%
91.80%
95.08%
96.72%
More
100.00%
Average: 45
73.77% 3
81.97%
90.16%
Percent of Total Expenditure on Electricity Costs– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

23. Electricity costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)

24. Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)
Roads & Storm Water costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Average:
Frequency
Cumulative % 44
72.13% 9
86.89% 3
91.80%
96.72% 1
98.36%
More
100.00%
Average: 21
34.43% 7
45.90% 6
55.74%
70.49%
75.41%
85.25%
95.08%
Percent of Total Expenditure on Roads & Storm Water Costs– 2003/4 compared to 2009/10
Frequency = Number of Municipalities (N=61)

25. Roads & Storm Water costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)

26. Number of Municipalities that Pass Number of Municipalities that Fail
summary
Performance Summary
Number of Municipalities that Pass
Number of Municipalities that Fail
Employee costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 38 23
Remuneration costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 36 25
Repairs & Maintence costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 33 28
Depreciation & Amontisation costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Finance charges as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Materials & Bulk purchases costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 18 43
Grants & subsides costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 44 17
Other expenditure costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 26 35
Water & Sanitation costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Electricity costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 49 12
Housing costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 6 55
Roads& Storm Water costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better)
Other costs as a % of total expenditure (Smaller is Better) 30 31
Property rates as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Service charges as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Investment revenue as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Government grants as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Public contritibutions & donations as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better) 3 58
Other own revenue as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better) 32 29
External loans as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better) 5 56
Public contributions & donations as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better) 4 57
Grants & subsides as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better)
Other revenue as a % of total revenue (Bigger is Better) 13 48
Average
25.78
35.22