1. 2013 Year of the Correctional Official DCS 2012/13 QUARTER 3 PERFORMANCE REPORT Act: CDC Strategic Management DCS Portfolio Committee 20 March 2013 2012/13 3 rd Quarter Performance Report

2. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance Background Working from the Annual Report- 2011/12, the Department had challenges in terms of internal processes in planning and report. As a result a number discrepancies were identified by the Auditor-General as follows: (i)Planning Non-alignment between performance indicator and target Non-alignment of SP Indicators with reports APP indicators Poor operational planning Non-alignment of Ops plan with the APP Lack of relationship between planned target and activities Corrective measures not implemented (ii) Monitoring and Reporting Incorrect calculation in reporting Discrepancies between year to date in quarterly and AR. Inconsistencies between quarterly reports Indicators/targets whereby actual performance reported are incomplete or not based on the measurement criteria of the indicator Actual figures reported are the same as the figure for planned targets.

3. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance Background… (iii) Monitoring and Reporting… Less quality performance reports Inconsistencies in Calculation methods during reporting Failure to understand own data - indicators Submission of performance reports is less valued by the information owners Regions submit reports late compromised quality of information, information changes (iv) Evaluation Policy: compliance in planning and reporting procedure - Lack of performance information ownership Non-compliance in planning procedures - Negation in submission on operational plans 1. Non-compliance in reporting procedures - The question of authenticity of information submitted: signature by the BPM

4. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance Background… (v) Other issues includes: Operational plans – Targets not aligned to indicators – numbers or percentages used to report qualitative indicator/target/variable – A national target that is not aligned with regional targets – targets provided for regions cannot add into national target – Inconsistencies in setting Regional Targets – Regional Targets set not set on monthly basis – Separate targets merged together – Quarterly targets not aligned with annual targets – Activities provided not sufficient to demonstrate how the target will be met Monthly reports – Incorrect templates used – cut and paste from previous financial year; and Omission Long stories are provided instead of clearly state achievements – Outputs reading differently from those in the current APP – Unclear percentage calculations – Misaligned actual performance information to planned targets

5. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance Underlying principles of the Analysis Report 1.Performance is represented as indicated and submitted by branches 2.Representation of performance is based on promised or planned level of achievement at end of Q3 3.No subjective interpretation 4.Percentages do not seek to represent value or weighted performance achieved BUT comparison of actual with planned targets. 5.Where no report is attached that target is represented and not-achieved 6.Where report against target is inaccurate or misaligned it is considered also not-achieved 7.Where report against targets gives some work done towards the target that is represented as work in-progress and there not achieved

6. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

7. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

8. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

9. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

10. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

11. DCS - Q3: Oct – Dec 2012 PERFORMANCE REVIEW…programme performance

12. 2013 Year of the Correctional Official DCS 2012/13 PERFORMANCE REVIEW Thank You Q&A