1. 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

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

3. Funding flow
National Treasury
Presidency
DPME
Stats SA
NPC
NYDA

4. 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

5. 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 ( evaluations, then 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.

6. 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 period, increased to 14 outcomes, link to departmental strategic plans and APPs

7. 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

8. 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)

9. 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 calls received, 94% resolved, customer satisfaction surveys also being carried out
Piloting system of citizen-based monitoring

10. 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

11. 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

12. Budget

13. DPME Budget and Expenditure Summary
11/12
12/13
13/14
14/15
15/16
16/17
Allocation
96 202
% Increase -
81.0%
10.7%
8.0%
5.5%
5.9%
Expenditure
92 841
% Spent
96.5%
92.0%
99.5%

15. Spent 99.5%

16. 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

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

18. 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

19. 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.

20. 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

21. THANK YOU
See the DPME website: for a range of
documents on DPME programmes as well as guidelines for M&E