1. The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Management Performance Assessment Tool (MPAT) and progress on performance assessments review HoDs Standing Committee on Appropriations 19 March 2013

2. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Management Performance Assessments (MPAT) 2

3. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Why?  Improved management practices key to improved service delivery  Weak administration (financial management, supply chain management, asset management, human resource management, planning, monitoring, facilities management) is a recurring theme across the priorities and is leading to poor service delivery, e.g.  Textbook delivery problems in some provinces  Shortages of ARVs in some provinces  Undermining of small business development policy through non-payment of suppliers within 30 days  Appointment of unqualified people in key municipal positions, leading to poor municipal service delivery  Develop a culture of continuous improvement and sharing of good practice  Link institutional performance to individual assessment of HoD 3

4. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation  MPAT first implemented in the 2011/12 financial year, after Cabinet approval to annually assess national and provincial departments using MPAT – Based on international experience (Canada, Kenya, New Zealand) where Office of President or Premier assesses management practices with aim of driving improvements through competition and sharing of good practice  103 departments participated in the first round of assessments  2011/12 self-assessment results for national departments have been published on the DPME website  Important base-line established  Many departments have implemented improvements as a result of this initial assessment  For 2012/13 all (156) national and provincial departments participated in assessment 4 Background

5. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation How?  Assessment is 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 5

6. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 6 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?

7. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Moderation  DPME only started MPAT assessments and tested the moderation process in 2011/12  Results of the 2011/12 reflect the self-assessment only  For the 2012/13 assessments, detailed peer moderation of self-assessments was conducted  Policy and implementing experts from national and provincial departments were used as moderators  Moderation process also clarified policy intent and identified shortcomings in some management areas  Opportunity for identification of good practice  Departments were given a further opportunity to comment on moderated scores  Moderated results will be published in July 2013 after presentation to Cabinet 7

8. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation MPAT ratings 8 LevelDescription Level 1Non-compliance with legal/regulatory requirements Level 2Partial compliance with legal/regulatory requirements Level 3Full compliance with legal/regulatory requirements Level 4Full compliance and doing things smartly

9. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 9 1.3 Performance Area: Monitoring and Evaluation 1.3.1 Standard name: Integration of monitoring and evaluation in performance and strategic management Standard definition: The department’s ability to do monitoring and evaluation, produce useful and reliable information, and use performance information in performance and strategic management. StandardsEvidence DocumentsLevel Department does not have a M&E or Performance Management Information Policy or Framework Level 1 Department has a M&E or Performance Management Information Policy or Framework. Department does not have standardised mechanisms and/or processes and procedures to collect, manage and store data. M&E or Performance Management Information Policy / Framework Level 2 Department has a M&E or Performance Management Information Policy or Framework. Department has standardised mechanisms and/or processes and procedures to collect, manage and store data.  M&E or Performance Management Information Policy / Framework  Standardised monitoring reports generated from formal departmental performance information source(s) Level 3 Level 3 plus: At least one evaluation of a major programme is conducted or in process or planned Level 3 plus:  Evaluation Reports or  Evaluation plans Level 4

10. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 10 2.1 Performance Area: Service Delivery Improvement 2.1.1 Standard name: Service delivery improvement mechanisms Standard definition: Departments have an approved service delivery charter, standards and service delivery improvement plans and adheres to these to improve services. StandardsEvidence DocumentsLevel Department does not have a service charter and service standards. Level 1 Department has a draft service charter and service standards  Service charter and Service standards Level 2 Department has an approved service charter, service standards and SDIP Department has consulted stakeholders/service recipients on service standards and SDIP Department displays its service charter  Service charter, service standards and SDIP  Evidence of consultation with stakeholders/ service recipients Level 3 Level 3 plus: Department quarterly monitors compliance to service delivery standards Management considers monitoring reports Reports are used to inform improvements to business processes Level 3 plus:  Minutes of management meetings reflecting discussion of service delivery improvement  Progress reports and monitoring reports Level 4

11. 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 have been documented independently and available on www.goodxample.org www.goodxample.org  Focused workshops on the case studies are been held with departments  Aim is to encourage departments to learn from each other  New case studies currently been finalised will also provide examples and templates for other departments to use to improve their performance  DPME, DPSA and NT offer support to departments to improve management practices 11

12. 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  Generally audits focus on compliance only, whereas MPAT focuses on getting managers to work more smartly  MPAT also covers a broader range of management areas than audits cover  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 savings from reducing corruption and increasing value for money 12

13. 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  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 13

14. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Limitations of this process  MPAT focuses on processes related to converting inputs into outputs  Does not focus on assessing whether the right outputs are been produced to achieved desired outcomes and impacts  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, as reported in their annual reports, should also be used to assess this 14

15. The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Revisions to HoD performance review system  Current system not working well – many HoDs not being regularly assessed  FOSAD asked DPME and DPSA to propose changes  Proposals approved by FOSAD MANCO, then Cabinet  Key proposals aimed at addressing current problems:  Presidency and OtP to intervene if PAs are not submitted timeously  DG in Presidency and provincial DGs to convene assessment panels  Panels will make recommendations to EAs who will have final decision  If EAs do not respond in time, panel recommendation will be taken as final decision  Secretariat function to move from PSC to Presidency and OtP  Presidency and OtP to intervene if verification statements not submitted timeously  DPSA needs to issue new PMDS policy for HoDs in terms of Public Service Act and Public Service Regulations in order for the changes to be implemented – we are currently awaiting the new policy from DPSA 15

16. 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