2016 Annual Report on Implementation of the Action Plan of the Public Administration Reform Strategy in the Republic of Serbia, 2015-2017

Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government

February 2017

CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations2Executive summary3I Introduction Aggregate Overview9II Key Achievements by Objectives23III Key Challenges and Priorities37IV PAR Coordination and Management System39Annex 1: Implementation of the Action Plan in 2016 contributions of responsible institutions . in a separate document

List of Abbreviations

a

Activity

OECD

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

ACA

Anti-Corruption Agency

CSO

Civil society organisations

AP

Action Plan

PEFA

Public expenditure and financial accountability assessment

BRA

Business Registers Agency

BV

Baseline value

AP 23

Action Plan for Negotiations on Chapter 23

OFM

Public Finance Management Reform Programme

AP PAR

Action Plan implementing the Public Administration Reform Strategy in the Republic of Serbia

GPRIS

Government Planning and Reporting Information System

HCSC

High Civil Service Council

PAP

Public administration principles

GenSec

Governments General Secretariat

r.

result

EAD

Electronic Administration Directorate

RGA

Republic Geodetic Authority

SAI

State Audit Institution

RS

Republic of Serbia

EC

European Commission

PAR

Public administration reform

ERP

Economic reform programme

RSPP

Republic Secretariat for Public Policies

EU

European Union

WB

World Bank

EU IPA

European Unions Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance

SCTM

Standing Conference of Towns and Municipalities

IS

Information system

SIGMA

OECD Support for Improvement in Governance and Management

LSGU

Local self-government units

PARC

Public Administration Reform Council

LSGU and AP

Local self-government and autonomous province units

HRMS

Human Resource Management Service

PU

Public administration

TOR

Terms of reference

SEIO

Serbian European Integration Office

PPO

Public Procurement Office

Cont.

Continually

AI

Administrative Inspectorate

MPALSG

Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government

HRM

Human resources management

IMF

International Monetary Fund

FR

Functional review

IPG

Interministerial Project Group

FMC

Financial management and control

MoJ

Ministry of Justice

TV

Target value

MTBF

Medium-term Budget Framework Fiscal Strategy

CMST

Change Managment Support Team

MoIA

Ministry of Internal Affairs

CROSO

Central Registry of Compulsory Social Insurance

MFin

Ministry of Finance

OGP

Open Government Partnership,

NACS

National Anti-Corruption Strategy in the Republic of Serbia for the Period 2013-2018

EGDI

E Government Development Index

SAB

State administration body/bodies

UNDESA

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Executive summary

Implementation of AP for PAR 2015-2017 the Past Two Years: Results Achieved

From 2015 to the end of 2016, 5 results set out in the Action Plan were fully achieved, which a 28% improvement was measured against the 18 originally scheduled to be completed in 2015 and 2016. In terms of the five objectives and the individual results set out in the AP for PAR, the First Goal, which pertains to staff rightsizing, optimisation and restructuring of the state administration and implementation of e-services, saw the largest number of activities from a quantitative point of view.

1. The process of rightsizing and fiscal consolidation is successfully implemented (the number of employees in public administration has been reduced by 37,900 since the end of 2013, when the ban on new employment was put in place, with budget savings of EUR 43 achieved in 2016 alone from the rightsizing process). Cumulative savings achieved in the entire period since the beginning of the rightsizing process to date are approximately EUR 180 million. In the last two years alone, since the targeted rightsizing programme has been in place, the number of employees in public administration has been reduced by 24,156. By the end of May this year, the Government of Serbia will pass a Decision setting the Maximum Number of Employees in 2017 and the process of passing this decision is coordinated by the MPALSG. The Decision setting the Maximum Number of Employees will apply to local self-governments, as well as the national level of government (all state bodies and public services). The rightsizing process was designed to identify redundancies only where there actually are any, while at the same time preserving and reinforcing the key functions and duties of the state. We have blocked the rightsizing of medical staff, the staff of social security institutions, any posts and capacities relevant for EU integration and the staff of inspectorates. We have identified surplus employees in posts that could be outsourced to the private sector, as well as in network institutions that were established in the past and no longer serve their original purpose. Through international benchmarking and sector-level analyses, we have demonstrated that the level of public sector employment in Serbia is not too high when measured against the civilizational level we strive to achieve. In fact, quite the opposite is the case: Serbia is among the countries with fewest public administration employees in Europe, measured by the ratio of public servants to 100 inhabitants. This year and the next one we expect to proceed to the second pillar of the optimisation process, which is reorganisation and implementation of the principle we have adhered to since the beginning of the process: to achieve more with less. In the coming months, we intend to focus on achieving more, i.e. on making the system sustainable and providing better service to citizens with the resources we have. In summary, the number of employees is not in itself an issue, especially at this point, after two comprehensive waves of rightsizing; however, there is still the issue of expenses in certain sectors of public administration as a share of GDP, as well as the issue of efficiency of the services those sectors provide, or should provide. These are areas where we aim to improve, which is why we intend to focus on reorganisation in the coming months. Our key task and the goal to which we are committed is to make our public administration more efficient and to help it become a true service provider for citizens and businesses.

2. In May 2017, we expect to adopt Vision Statements and Action Plans on reorganisation of the network systems and public services (the ones that are vital for Serbian citizens): health care, education and social security, to ensure they operate more efficiently with the resources they have. The efforts to cut employment have clearly been comprehensive, constant and intensive and there is no need to insist on further layoffs; however, it is crucial that we begin transforming and reorganising our network systems (in particular health care, education, compulsory health insurance organisations the Republic Health Insurance Fund, the Pension and Disability Insurance Fund, the National Employment Service, the Tax Administration, the Geodetic Authority etc.).

3. A normative framework for the development of the human resources management function at Autonomous Provinces and local self-government units has been established: the newly-enacted Law on Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units has expanded the scope of the professional mechanisms, principles and standards it sets out to cover double the number of employees covered by the previous law (from 24,900 civil servants (according to staffing tables), it now applies to another 29,818 employees in Autonomous Provinces and local self-government units). The Governments Council on Professional Development in Local Self-Government Units has been formed and mandated to: give opinions on draft general professional development programmes presented by state bodies; analyse initiatives by local self-government units for implementing general programmes and drafts of new specific professional development programmes; propose mandatory elements of general and specific professional development programmes; propose criteria and conditions for accreditation of professional development providers; monitor the effects of application of that Law with regard to professional development and propose potential improvements; cooperate with local self-government units and their associations to identify their needs for professional development; and arrange for the keeping of official records of approved and implemented programmes, accredited programme providers and participants in professional development programmes. The next big step will be the establishment of the National Public Administration Training Academy (more detail can be found In the text below).

4. The 2015 Public Financial Management (PFM) Reform Programme has been passed and PFM monitoring has begun. The Economic Reform Programme (ERP) for the period 2016 to 2018 has been passed.

5. The Financial Agreement on Financing of the Sector Reform Contract for Public Administration Reform (EU Sector Budget Support - 80 million) was signed on 5 December 2016; the Law on Ratification of the Loan Agreement (World Bank Program for Results (PforR) Public Administration Modernization and Optimization Program) between the Republic of Serbia and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ( 69 million in the period 2016-2019) was enacted on 15 November 2016.

6. Application of the Law on General Administrative Procedure has been successful and efforts are underway to harmonise more than 250 laws and even more pieces of secondary legislation pertaining to specific administrative fields and procedures that apply to them. The provisions of the Law on General Administrative Procedure which require state bodies to exchange ex officio any data citizens may need in order to enjoy a right or comply with a duty, where such data are available in official registers (e.g. master registries, register of nationals, records of addresses of evidence, real estate cadastre, registers of businesses, records of employment or unemployment status etc.) have been in force since 8 June 2016. Citizens no longer need to obtain documents containing such data from state bodies; instead, the data are retrieved directly through official communication and exchange between the state bodies themselves. In order to have more efficient administration and the GAPA to better function, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government and the Directorate for eGovernment finished connecting six databases (Civil Registers, the Ministry of Interior, Tax Administration, Croso, National Employment Service, Pension Fund) containing about 80% of the data of all citizens and from 1 June this automatic electronic exchange will start to work. The training of employees in all local governments in Serbia has been completed to use this new system. To provide for active involvement of citizens in overseeing the implementation of public policies and enable active communication between citizens and institutions, we have launched the website Dobra uprava (Good Governance), designed to inform citizens about the progress of public administration reform and mandatory exchange of data contained in official registers. The content available on this website will be continually expanded and updated.

7. Regarding application of the Law on Inspection Supervision, the Coordination Commission has contributed to improved coordination of inspection activities between all Republic-level inspectorates, while the results of the inspections of unregistered entities carried out in 2016 can be seen from the data obtained from the Business Registers Agency. Namely, in 245,392 inspections, the inspectors found 3,656 unregistered entities. All trainings planned for 2016 in the field of inspection have been completed and the target set for 2016 (1,300 employees at inspectorates) has been exceeded 1,530 inspectors at national and local levels have been trained. Directorate for eGovernment released the tender for a unified information platform eInspektor which will further contribute to the transparency of the work of inspection services, as well as better risk analysis in order to do "more with less and chose the best bidder. The procedure is in progress in the Commission for Protection of Bidders Rights after one complaint and it is expected the contract to be signed, following the Commission's decision, with one of the consortium that participated in the tender and after the implementation of this important project to be continued. Finally, for better functioning of the Coordination Commission, Ministry of Public Administration and Local Government has received support from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), which will financially support the work of 6-member team (Support Unit Coordination Commission). We expect this unit to start operating in early June. Also, in November 2016 the "checklist" of all inspections have been finalized by which inspection services have become more transparent, and the economy was given another form of the support to do business in accordance with the law.

8. We have provided for coordinated management of the development of e-government by establishing the institutional framework and completing the legislative framework. New electronic services have been designed and implemented which use the main registers and are widely promoted the MPALSG has collaborated with other Ministries, including in particular the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Construction, to develop two important registers (the Central Register of Citizens and the Register of Address Information), which will ensure in the future that citizens and the industry have a genuine e-government at their disposal. MPALSG with the support of the Faculty of Organizational Sciences (FON) started the process of setting the Metaregister (registry of all registries) finally to have a list of all registers and databases, their format and the level of an update, so that in the future we could exactly know if and how we can link them with the aim to create new electronic services for citizens and businesses. After more than seven years, the work on transferring registries (certificates) in electronic form has come to very end, and it was agreed with the Ministry of the Interior that all information on citizenship will be transferred in electronic form by the end of 2017, in order to apply from 1 January 2018 (so that all certificates and citizenship will be led in the same central system). In the past 12 months, 160 new e-services were designed for the e-Portal, which means the e-Portal currently provides access to 710 different services made available by 143 state bodies, with more than 700,000 users.

The most popular e-services in 2016 were the 3 new ones:

Electronic replacement of old health insurance booklets with new health insurance cards;

e-Baby;

Online enrolment of children in preschool institutions;

Citizens have most frequently used the national e-Government Portal to obtain extracts from the Central Register of Births and certificates of citizenship, as well as to report issues to the competent inspectorates.

9. The plan of priority activities to reduce administrative burden in the Republic of Serbia in 20162018, Stop Bureaucracy, is being implemented successfully. The plan envisages 13 priority activities for the Government of Serbia to implement, selected on the basis of their effects for citizens and businesses and on the basis of readiness of institutions and IT systems for their implementation.

10. The Law on National Academy for Professional Development in Public Administration is one of the priorities of the Ministry and the Government aimed at creating a sustainable system for professional development of civil servants and continual improvement of their knowledge and skills. A new professional development system will be based on competences which civil servants will be required to have in order to perform their duties in a modern and efficient fashion. MPALSG completed the preparation of Draft Law and during the April and May held a public debate. In parallel with this, relevant amendments were also prepared for the regulations which govern the labour law status of civil servants and employees in the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and LSGUs in order to harmonise the provisions pertaining to professional development with the formation and operation Academy.

11. The Strategy for Creating an Enabling Environment for Civil Society Development is ready for adoption by the Government and, as you are no doubt aware, this will be the first national strategic document by which the Government will commit itself to create an environment that will foster permanent civil dialogue; furthermore, the document will also ensure systemic participation of CSOs in the decision-making processes, create a framework for transparent allocation of budget funds through competitions for CSO projects and programmes, further define the framework for budget co-financing of EU approved projects and provide for the formation of the first Council for Cooperation with Civil Society. Local self-governments, as the key venues for regular exchange of opinions and cooperation with citizens, must also play an important role in this. We engaged and cooperate with civil society organisations on a regular basis.

12. The public procurement system has been improved. In August 2016, the AJSRB implemented the Public Procurement IT System (ISCJN) for centralised public procurements, while the Public Procurement Office this year focused its efforts primarily on activities designed to facilitate the implementation of regulations in the field of public procurement.

Priorities for 2017 (May-December)

The public administration reform process is a synthesis of designing and implementing horizontal policies which, when implemented together, result in major changes in the organisational and operative structure of Serbias public administration. According to the PAR Strategy and the AP PAR, the reform process should be a comprehensive, thorough process which will radically change Serbias administration at all levels. This is the key to Serbias EU integration process, beside the economic governance and rule of law, and has also been recognised as the driver of all changes.

The measures designed to implement the reform under the AP PAR are a set of complex activities to be implemented over a two-year timeframe, which will require not only amendments to the legislative framework across all segments, but also changes in the business culture of the public administration.

The Ministry has evaluated performance in the period 2015-2016. Taking into account the far-reaching effects of changes and the complexity of the Action Plan, which must be implemented at a time of fiscal consolidation and public spending cuts, and taking into account also the limited capacities available to the administration, progress has been evaluated as moderately positive and a decision has been made to prioritise activities for the coming period.

In this context, we have identified four key priorities in total for this year, which we believe will be crucial for further progress of the PAR, namely:

1. Optimisation of public administration, through implementation of action plans developed on the basis of functional reviews by the World Bank team in the previous period. The Action Plan based on the horizontal functional review of the so-called Central Government Plus is a collaborative effort of the Ministry, other state bodies and the Change Management Group and provides a mid-term plan for optimisation (2017-2019). Dialogue between all stakeholders during the development of these plans was essential, as it enabled the stakeholders to identify measures and agree on a plan for optimisation of the central-level administration in four areas:

Organisational transparency;

Improved organisational structure of public administration;

Improved horizontal coordination;

Strategic human resource management in public administration.

The dialogue enabled all stakeholders access to the recommendations given by the World Bank team and allowed them to be involved when the measures were designed, so they could identify those measures that were necessary and could be implemented in the short and medium term.

Three vertical functional reviews covered the three largest administration systems and the challenges they face finance, agriculture and environment protection and the service system for citizens (education, social security and health care). An Action Plan for the system within the purview of the Ministry of finance has been agreed and its implementation is identified as a priority in 2017, while recommendations relating to the remaining two systems are expected to be completed in mid-2017, after which relevant action plans will be developed on the basis of them by the end of 2017.

Further implementation under this priority will involve implementation of the agreed measures and provision of support to individual institutions in managing the change process brought about by the proposed measures.

2. Human resources management, through implementation of the key Strategic Document on Human Resources Management in State Administration. This will involve the passing and implementation of:

The Bill amending the Law on Civil Servants;

The Bill on National Academy for Professional Development in Public Administration;

The Bill amending the Law on Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units.

In the coming months, the Ministry will focus on implementing a new civil service system based on performance. The Strategic Document provided the basis for new amendments to the Law on Civil Servants and for the establishment of a new system that would cover all aspects from employment, through performance review, professional development and evaluation to termination of employment. To that end, the Ministry will work on a new Draft Law and the necessary secondary legislation. In particular, the Ministry will continue its efforts to facilitate the formation and functioning of an institution in charge of professional development (the National Academy for Professional Development in Public Administration) in order to create an integrated, modern professional development system in the public administration. This institution will develop in stages, by assuming duties in the field of professional development from the existing institutions and structures together by developing cooperation with them, in accordance with the Law.

3. Transparency and efficiency of the work of administration through continued successful implementation of:

The Law on Inspection Supervision, and

The Law on General Administrative Procedure.

Professional development of civil servants will be continued in order to ensure efficient implementation of these laws and to standardise and improve the work of the administration.

The Coordination Commission will in any case get tremendous support in their work through Support Unit which will have a total of six members of the team. As mentioned, we expect a quick signing of a contract with one of the bidders for the Information system eInspektor, in accordance with the Decision of the Commission, who worked on the tender and the Decision of the Commission for Bidders Protection.

We will continue working towards and providing support to other Ministries as they work towards harmonising of other laws with the Law on General Administrative Procedure. We will continue providing trainings, standardising the work of all institutions (at central and local self-government levels) and improving data exchange.

4. e-Government A priority is to adopt a new Action Plan on implementation of the e-Government Development Strategy for the period 2017-2019. The first Draft Action Plan for the period 2017-2019 has been prepared and the Ministry and the Directorate for e-Government are currently finalising it in consultation with other relevant institutions.

The Ministry is working towards strengthening the legislative framework, in order to provide preconditions for the development of new services, and is continuing its work on the following drafts:

The Law on Central Register of Citizens of Serbia, which will provide the legal basis for the establishment, use and ownership of the Central Register of Citizens.

The Law on e-Government, which will provide the legal basis for improved electronic services of the administration and introduce a systemic approach to e-Government in Serbia. Once this Law is enacted, efforts will continue to harmonise other regulations and adopt new standards that are necessary for e-Government to function, in accordance with the latest EU standards.

5. The Public Finance Management Reform

In line with the PFM Program (2016-2020), the most important reform goals in the next period are set out under the following pillars: planning and budgeting of public expenditure; efficient and effective execution of the budget; effective financial control.

More specifically, the priority measures and the results planned to be implemented in 2017 are: improving the credibility of macroeconomic forecasts; the improvement of the scope of the national budget; better medium-term planning of budget users; improving the operational capacity of coordination and budget planning of public investment; continuation of implementation of the Strategy of transformation of the Tax Administration; work on improving the capacity to manage public debt; adoption of the Strategy for IFC in public sector for 2017 - 2020; further improvement of the budget inspection capacity; improved coverage and quality of budget execution reports and fiscal reports; improving the coverage and quality of external audits; internal functions of quality control and assurance of the quality within the SAI fully developed and operational.

In addition to the priorities listed above, other reform processes under the Action Plan for PAR, the Sectoral Budget Support and other planning instruments will also be continued. It is worth noting that, in April 2017, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-government made initial steps towards developing the Action Plan for implementation of the Public Administration Reform Strategy for the period 2018-2020.

It is our intention to develop this document with the broad participation of numerous institutions, members of the expert community, stakeholders and CSOs which can and should contribute to making Serbia a state for its citizens. The aim is to have the new AP ready for adoption by the Government in January 2018.

I Introduction Aggregate Overview

The overall purpose of the monitoring, reporting and evaluation system for any public policy is to (a) gather information during the implementation of such policy in order to see whether the planned activities are implemented as intended and to identify any risks arising due to the activities not being implemented or due to the absence of expected outcome, and (b) to assess the progress made as a result of such policy in terms of objectives and expected outcomes, as defined by the Government. The ultimate goal of monitoring is to make timely decisions in order to improve the outcomes of such policy and to make changes during implementation where appropriate. Monitoring of public administration reform is based on the Action Plan implementing the Public Administration Reform Strategy (hereinafter referred to as AP PAR) (Official Gazette of RS No. 31/15).[footnoteRef:1] [1: Action Plan Implementing the Public Administration Reform Strategy in the Republic of Serbia, 2015-2017 (Official Gazette of RS No. 31/15), Annex 3, p. 71.]

AP PAR 2015-2017

Statistical overview

Reporting is a crucial step in the monitoring process and it comprises compiling concise and specific reports based on previously collected information on the progress made in the implementation of public policy outcomes. As regards the frequency of reporting, the AP PAR provides for semi-annual and annual reporting. Reporting is coordinated and conducted by an organisational unit of the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government designated to monitor and report on the attainment of PAR Strategy objectives (the Public Administration Reform Management Group), as well as the relevant organisational units of other competent Ministries and state administration bodies designated as responsible for achieving the results in the PAR Action Plan through their contact points (deputy members) in the Interministerial Project Group (Decision of the Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-Government No. 119-01-00242/2014-04 of 23 February 2015[footnoteRef:2]). [2: The Decision was amended by the Decision amending the Decision setting up an Interministerial Project Group on Technical Tasks in the Coordination and Monitoring of Implementation of the Public Administration Reform Strategy in the Republic of Serbia 2015-2017 No. 119-01-00242/2014-04 of 7 August 2015 due to staff changed in state administration bodies and civil society organisations.]

The methodological approach in the preparation of this Report and in the creation of the Action Plan is result-oriented and focused on monitoring the achieved results and indicators, while also retaining elements of the procedural (implementation-oriented) approach to monitoring which is based on activities. The aim is to ensure that monitoring does not end with activities and their outputs, but covers also the outcomes achieved through those activities, the actual, real-life changes that are due to public policy intervention. In this context, the AP PAR matrix was designed to be result-oriented, but with a list of main activities which are expected to be necessary in order to achieve the result and a timeframe for execution of those activities was set, so that progress in the achievement of the results can be monitored. To ensure also procedural (implementation-oriented) monitoring of documents, the AP PAR combines result-based monitoring with a timeframe for the execution of specific activities within each results, which are set as the final quarters in which the activities have to be completed, rather than as an overall timeframe for execution. The performance indicators for Action Plan execution are defined at the level of the objectives and at the level of the results.

The AP PAR also provides for the compiling of semi-annual reports, focus more on direct results of the implemented activities, while annual reports also monitor higher-level information (outcome indicators) and summarise the results of all implemented activities to obtain information on what has been achieved on a larger scale. In this report, the status of specific activities will be shown as one of three possible levels (each represented by a different colour), depending on whether they are fully implemented (green), partially implemented (yellow) or unimplemented (red). A fully implemented activity is an activity that is implemented as defined in the Action Plan. A partially implemented activity is an activity that is more than 50% completed. An unimplemented activity is an activity that is less than 50% implemented.

Reporting timeframe

MPALSG sends templates and instructions to contact persons

Contact persons enter data online and submit completed tables and the report to MPALSG

MPALSG finalises and publishes the report

The report is submitted to all coordination levels

Semi-annual report

by 5 July

by 20 July

by 15 August

In accordance with the time schedule of the meetings

Annual report

by 10 January

by 1 February

by 1 March

In accordance with the time schedule of the meetings

Table 1: Time schedule of semi-annual and annual reporting process

There were three monitoring reports in 2015 and 2016: two semi-annual status reports and the 2015 annual report on the results achieved in 2015.[footnoteRef:3] The first semi-annual report on AP PAR activities implemented in the first half of 2015 was compiled and posted on the MPALSG website in August 2015 and was endorsed and adopted at all levels of coordination including: the Interministerial Project Group (on 7 October 2015), the Collegium of State Secretaries (on 16 December 2015) and the Public Administration Reform Council (on 17 December 2015). The annual monitoring report on the results achieved in 2015 was compiled and posted on the MPALSG website on 1 March 2016 and was endorsed by the Interministerial Project Group in its 4th meeting on 6 April 2016. The semi-annual report on the AP PAR activities undertaken in the first half of 2016 was compiled and posted on the MPALSG website in August 2016. [3: All three reports can be found on the following links: in Serbian http://www.mduls.gov.rs/reforma-javne-uprave-sprovodjenje-strategije.php or, in English, http://www.mduls.gov.rs/english/reforma-javne-uprave.php ]

In terms of results and activities, the semi-annual Report on Implementation of the PAR Action Plan showed progress: 52% of the activities were fully implemented, 24% were partially implemented, while 24% were not timely implemented. Most of the implemented activities were in the field of optimisation of state administration, under the First Objective of AP PAR. According to the Annual Report on Implementation of the PAR Action Plan, out of the total number of indicators of attainment of the result for the three-year period, in 2015, 23 indicators showed progress, 12 were not achieved, while 36 indicators were not intended to be measured in 2015 (out of the 47 results in total, 5 results were due by 2015: 1.3.3, 1.4.1, 2.3.2, 3.1.1 and 3.3.1.). Of these 5 results, one was fully implemented (Public Finance Reform Programme has been adopted), one was partially implemented, while 3 were not implemented. Of the 107 activities planned for 2015, 37% were fully implemented, 23% were partially implemented, while 40% were not implemented.

According to the Reports, the most common reasons for deviation from the plan include insufficiency capacities, length and scope of consultations, the need to define the scope of reform (definitions of the public sector and public administration), frequent re-prioritisation of activities or merging of activities, the need for better planning of public policies and the need for improved coordination, which should be taken into account in particular in the next AP PAR planning cycle. The monitoring and reporting system should use reports as an early warning system, to ensure timely reaction to attain the plans that have been set.

* * *

For the purpose of semi-annual reporting on AP PAR implementation in 2016, in an effort to ensure increased transparency in the reporting process, better accessibility of reports and accuracy of original data entries, while also bearing in mind the need to expedite and simplify the reporting process through direct online compiling of specific reports as a single document, the MPALSG has initiated an online reporting process based on a Microsoft SharePoint collaboration service, for which all members of the Interministerial Project Group have accounts (in accordance with the Action Plan, which specifies that contact points for reporting would be deputy members of the Interministerial Project Group).

Figure 1: Working Groups homepage on the Microsoft SharePoint collaboration service

The reporting tool of choice previously used in this process was a MS Excel spreadsheet; however, in order to simplify the reporting process, the tables were available in a MS Word document, which has been the format of choice for the Report. The civil servants in charge of monitoring the implementation of the AP PAR within relevant authorities were expected to fill in the appropriate column the aggregate data relevant for successful implementation of the public administration reform. Only those contact points who are in charge of coordination and reporting have the privileges to edit documents and enter aggregate reports, while other members have reading privileges; however, in this process it was important to ensure that the entire monitoring and reporting process is sufficiently transparent and inclusive for all members who would be in charge of decision-making in respect of this process (the total number of persons with privileges for the Working Groups Portal is 93, which includes representatives of the civil society organisations who participate in the Interministerial Project Group and can respond at any time to any information posed by state administration bodies).

The homepage contains all documents generated in the reporting process so far (reports, PAR Strategy, AP PAR, Reporting Instructions and User Manual for the Portal), as well as a reporting calendar and a table specifying the powers assigned for the specific period. In accordance with the established time schedule, on 9 January 2017 the MPALSG sent an invitation for the beginning of the monitoring period *for the purposes of semi-annual reporting, a workshop was held on 5 July 2016 to train all persons who had reporting activities in this period on how to use the Portal). The authorities were required to submit their individual reports by 1 February 2017, while the aggregate report is due by 1 March 2017. The individual reports submitted and entered by state authorities are aggregated in Annex 1 to this document.

Representatives of the non-governmental sectors participate on an equal footing with civil servants in the monitoring and decision-making of the Interministerial Project Group. They include 10 representatives of the 5 citizens associations (members of the Sectoral Civil Society Organisations (SECO) mechanism in the field of public administration) and 2 representatives of the Standing Conference of Towns and Municipalities (SCTM), as a link with local self-governments.

* * *

The AP PAR template defines 5 specific goals, 19 measures, 47 results, and 86 indicators both for results and for specific objectives/overall objective, out of which 24 indicators were taken over from the SIGMA Public Administration Principles (actually, the total number of indicators is 88, but two indicators are performance indicators for different results/goals and appear twice).

It is specified in the Action Plan that 19 measures within the specific results are based primarily on the headings included in the PAR strategy under specific objectives, which means they are subheadings in a document which groups together coherent and interrelated results. In other words, these measures do not have specific indicators assigned to them, since it would not be cost-effective to develop indicators at four different levels, and they are not directly monitored in this report.

Of the 47 results in total included in the AP PAR template, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government is the implementing institution responsible for 34 results, or 28 results excluding its subordinated bodies (the Administrative Inspectorate is the implementing institution responsible for 1 result, while the Electronic Administration Directorate is responsible for 5 results). The Ministry of Finance is responsible for achieving 8 results, the Ministry of Justice is responsible for achieving 1 result, the Republic Secretariat for Public Policies is responsible for achieving 3 results, while the Public Procurement Office is responsible for achieving 1 result.

Graph 1: Graphic representation of the implementing institutions responsible for AP PAR results

In respect of the overall goal, the 5 specific objectives and the 47 results, reports were requested from the competent institutions for all 85 indicators (the total number of indicators 86; however, 1 result/indicator was fully achieved in 2015, as originally planned), although it should be noted that there are no indicators corresponding to 24 Sigma indicators for 2016.[footnoteRef:4] In the preparation of the AP PAR, 11 of the 24 Sigma indicators were linked to specific objectives of AP PAR, while 13 were linked to specific results, to link public administration reform more closely to Serbias EU accession process and to make PAR monitoring more efficient and more economical (because analyses and measurements are made on the basis of data provided by Serbia for the indicators of the Public Administration Principles (SIGMA)). This report will present the baseline value determined by SIGMA for 2014 and the target values which Serbia intends to achieve 2017. It should be noted, however, that SIGMAs Principles relate to state administration and that, for certain specific objectives, the scope of public administration reform is measured on the basis of indicators that relate to state administration, as originally specified in the AP PAR planning phase. This fact should be taken into account during the next cycle of planning or revision of the AP PAR. Furthermore, two indicators incorporated into the AP PAR are not measurable (Result 5.2.1. Indicator: Number of public servants convicted of offenses in relation to corruption (PAP 3), and Result 3.3.3. Indicator: Percentage of public funds users who have established the internal audit function in accordance with applicable national regulations and provided the minimum number of internal auditors for performance of this function in their institutions (PAP 6). For 5 SIGMA indicators, SABs provide their data on the basis of a similar methodology: [4: Sigma (OECD/European Commission) made a baseline measurement for 2014 in 2015, while in 2016 it made measurements for 2015 only for the indicators relating to specific principles (Service Provision and Human Resource Management; Public Finance Management). The values to be measured by Sigma in 2017 in respect of 2016 have not yet been measured as of the time of writing of this AP PAR Report. The document Public Administration Principles (2014) is available at: http://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/SER%20Principles%20of%20Public%20Administration%20Master%20Updated%2028%20January.pdf The results of the first measurement for Serbia, conducted in April 2015 (the Principles of Public Administration Serbia April 2015, Baseline Measurement), area available at: http://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Baseline-Measurement-2015-Serbia.pdf The monitoring report for specific 2015 indicators for Serbia is available at http://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Monitoring-Report-2016-Serbia.pdf ]

For Result 1.3.2. Medium term and annual planning in state administration bodies is based on Government priorities and the program budget and the implementation is being regularly monitored, the Indicator: The percentage of deviation of the total number of realized activities in relation to the total number of activities planned in the Governments annual work plan (PAP 2) upon cross-referencing the level of execution of the activity and the level of compliance with the indicator, it was assessed that Result 1.3.2 was partially achieved, because the percentage of deviation was 43%.

The indicators for Result 1.4.3. New electronic services which use basic registers are established and are being widely promoted, include 2 SIGMA indicators (The average time required for obtaining of personal identification documents upon application (PAP 5) and The number of services provided through the e- Government Portal (one-stop-shop system) (PAP 5)); however, the EAD also provides its own data and, based on all other indicators and activities, this result has been fully achieved in the observed period.

For Result 2.2.3 Established policy framework of strategic HRM and developed improved instruments for strategic HRM in the state administration, the HRMS provides reports on Annual fluctuations of civil servants at the central administration level (PAP 3) and Percentage of vacancies of civil servants on the level of central administration to be filled through an open competition (PAP 3), which are also considered to be achieved.

The values for the remaining 21 SIGMA indicators will be known after the measurement in 2017.

As regards the remaining 64 indicators defined at the level of results and overall goal, no values have been provided for 2 of them, 10 will be measured at the end of 2017, 2 are non-measurable (Result 3.3.2. Improved financial management and control system), 19 indicators show that the specified values have not been met, 2 indicate partial implementation, while 25 indicate full implementation.

The indicator statistics do not fully match the actual level of achievement of results. Although a revision of the Indicator Passport was initiated in 2016, the results are nevertheless more relevant for future amendments to the AP PAR than for the current situation, since the AP PAR has not been changed and the indicators could not have been changed either without going through the formal procedure of amendment of the AP PAR by the Government. As a consequence, some indicators are not measurable, for example the results relating to internal audit, while certain indicators, for example the accepted SIGMA indicators at the level of specific objectives, are not suitable for the scope of reform because they measure state administration and the scope of reform includes public administration. Also, there are indicators that do not reflect the results actually achieved, for example those relating to external control.

Although 2016 was an election year, due to the rightsizing process, from the time when the ban on new employment took effect (the end of 2013) until the end of 2016, the number of employees in indefinite employment in public administration and public utilities was reduced by 37,900. Compared with December 2014, in December 2016 there were 24,150 fewer employees, which was far above the target agreed with the IMF. In addition, budget savings resulting from rightsizing in 2016 (compared with 2015) were more than EUR 40 million.

The international indicators reflect the effort made to reform public administration: In terms of Government Effectiveness as measured by the World Bank, in 2014 Serbia progressed by 7 percentile rank place, from 51.18 to 58.17, in just one year, and remained at the same rank in 2015 (on a scale of 0-100).

Furthermore, measured by the E-Government Development Index (EGDI) published by the United Nations/UNDESA, in 2016 Serbia progressed 30 places among 193 countries (from 69th in 2014 to 39th in 2016) and ranked as high as 17th in terms of -Participation.

Similar success in 2016 was also seen on the World Banks Doing Business index, which in 2016 ranked Serbia 47th (1-190), which was an additional improvement from 2015 (when Serbia ranked 54th after progressing 32 places from the previous year's list).

According to the AP PAR, 13 of the total of 47 results should have been fully achieved by the end of 2016. Out of those 13, the result relating to improvement of the public procurement system (3.5.1) and the result relating to establishment of a legal framework for inspection (4.3.1) have been fully achieved. Two results have been partially achieved (1.4.2 and 5.3.2) and 9 results have not been achieved in the anticipated timeframe. As regards the remainder of the 47 results (18 of them), the listed key activities that are necessary for achieving specific objectives are supposed to be implemented in 2016 and 2017, so the entire results could be achieved by the end of implementation of the AP PAR. With regard to those results, only their progress in 2016 is monitored here.

4 results had been due for completion in 2015, but were also monitored in 2016 because they had been partially achieved or had not been achieved at all. 1 result had been achieved in 2015 (the Public Finance Reform Programme had been passed). Of the remaining 4 results, 2 were achieved, 1 was partially achieved, while 1 was not achieved:

1.3.3. Increased transparency of the public policy management system: the level of achievement of this indicator is at the planned level for 2016 (the share of the number of draft laws for which there was a public call during the process of preparation in the total number of draft laws adopted during the year was 50%); however, the activities remain partially implemented and the result is therefore considered to be partially achieved.

1.4.1. Coordinated management of e-Government development ensured, with introduction of the institutional framework and completion of the legal framework: formally, this result has been partially achieved as originally planned; however, new modalities have been found to ensure coordinated management of further development of e-Government, different from those originally planned in 2014. The strategic framework has been established (E-Government Development Strategy in RS 2015-2018 with AP 2015-2016), but a working party on e-government within the PAR Council has not been formed, although other working groups have been formed to coordinate the whole process: the Working Group on Open Data (under Decision number 119-01-10/2016-01 of 10 March 2016), the Working Group on Drafting of the E-Government Law (under Decision number 119-01-00254/2015-17 of 3 March 2016) and the Working Group on the Development of E-Government (under Decision number 119-01-15/2016 of 18 May 2016), which is, among other things, in charge of developing a new AP 2017-2018. For the purpose of developing an E-Government Development Strategy, a Council on the Improvement of the Information Technology Sector was formed at the Government level, which on 27 December passed the Draft Priority Objectives and Activities of All State Administration Bodies and the Governments Services for the Improvement of the IT Sector in Serbia.[footnoteRef:5] Although it has been achieved by different means, this result will be considered achieved in the period of interest. [5: A proposal of priority objectives and activities of all SA bodies and the Government's Services for IT sector improvement in Serbia can be found on the MPALSG website http://www.mduls.gov.rs/ accessible via the 4th banner on the right.]

From 47 resluts of the AP PAR, 13 results had the deadline in 2016. Of those 13, 2 are implemented, 2 are partially implemented and 9 result has not been implemented in due time. Of the 156 planned activities in 2016, 30% was achieved, 34% partially achieved, 36% have not been implemented.

In the period from 2015 to the end of 2016, 5 results has been fully implemented (1.4.1. Established management for coordination of the e-government development process and the completion of strategic and legal framework 1.4.3. New electronic services that use basic registers have been established and widely promoted 2.3.2 Established the legal framework for the development of the HRM function in AP and LSG, 3.5.1. Improving the Public Procurement System, 3.1.1. Adoption of the Program for the reform of public finances in 2015), which represents progress of 28% compared to 18 results that had the deadline 2015 and 2016 year.

As regards Result 2.3.2. Regulatory framework for development of human resource management function in AP and LSGU established, the indicators show the result has been achieved and all planned activities have been implemented (the Law on Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units (Official Gazette of RS No. 21/16) was enacted in March 2016; in 2016, the Government passed the Regulation on Classification of Posts and Criteria for Job Descriptions for Civil Servants in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units, the Regulation on Classification of Posts and Criteria for Job Descriptions for Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units and the Regulation on Internal and Public Job Announcements in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units; trainings on the implementation of these regulations are held on a regular basis).

Result 3.3.1. Mid-term framework for the implementation of internal financial control in the public sector adopted and its respective activities have not been implemented within the specified timeframe.

Graph 2: Graphic representation of progress in the achievement of indicators in 2016

Graph 3: Graphic representation of the share of achieved results which were due in 2015 and 2016 (18 results in total)

0 | Page

17 | AP PAR

Of the 223 activities in total in the Action Plan for the period 2015-2017, status reports for the past period have been requested for 156 activities. Of that number, 55 activities had been carried forward from 2015, while the estimated timeframe for completion for 101 activities was 2016. Furthermore, out of the total number of observed activities (156), 23 activities are implemented continually and are subject to monitoring in all years. In respect of a certain number of activities, the planned implementation timeframes were scheduled differently in other action plans which were adopted by the Government in the meantime, such as the Action Plan for Chapter 23[footnoteRef:6] adopted in the session of the Serbian Government held on 27 April 2016, the Economic Reform Programme for the Period 2016-2018 (ERP)[footnoteRef:7] adopted by the Serbian Government on 3 March 2016 and the Public Finance Management Reform Programme 2016-2020[footnoteRef:8] adopted by the Serbian Government on 28 November 2015 and supplemented on 25 December 2015. these activities were not included in the aggregate statistics presented in the Semi-Annual Report on Implementation of AP PAR in the First Half of 2016[footnoteRef:9]; however, as there has been no progress in the implementation of other action plans according to their timeframes and in most cases the new final deadline was the end of 2016, the activities are presented according to their original timeframe as set out in the AP PAR[footnoteRef:10]. [6: The original text of the Action Plan for Chapter 23 is available on the website of the Ministry of Justice, both in Serbian and in English (accessed on 25 July 2016): http://www.mpravde.gov.rs/tekst/12647/akcioni-plan-za-pregovaranje-poglavlja-23-usvojen-na-sednici-vlade-srbije-27-aprila-2016.php ] [7: Economic Reform Programme (ERP) for the Period 2016-2018, available on the website of the Ministry of Finance (accessed on 25 July 2016) in Serbian: http://www.mfin.gov.rs/UserFiles/File/dokumenti/2016/ERP-2016_sr.pdf and in English: http://www.mfin.gov.rs/UserFiles/File/dokumenti/2016/ERP-2016_en.pdf ] [8: Public Finance Management Reform Programme 2016-2020, available on the website of the Ministry of Finance (accessed on 25 July 2016), in Serbian: http://www.mfin.gov.rs/UserFiles/File/dokumenti/2016/Program%20reforme%20upravljanja%20javnim%20finansijama%202016-2020%20SR.PDF and in English: http://www.mfin.gov.rs/UserFiles/File/dokumenti/2016/Public%20Financial%20Management%20Reform%20Program%202016-2010%20EN.PDF ] [9: All reports on implementation of AP PAR can be found on the website of MPALSG, in Serbian: http://www.mduls.gov.rs/reforma-javne-uprave-sprovodjenje-strategije.php and in English: http://www.mduls.gov.rs/english/reforma-javne-uprave.php ] [10: Under the Action Plan for Chapter 23 23: Activity 2.2.5.2. - Adopt amendments to Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance based on analysis of implementation of Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance to date, in accordance with the Resolution of the National Assembly for 2014, shifts the timeframe for activities 5.1.1.2 and 5.3.1.6 under the AP PAR from Q4 2015 to Q4 2016. Activity 2.2.3.4 in the Action Plan for Chapter 23 - Conduct a needs analysis taking into account implementation of existing norms on regulation of legal framework for prevention of conflicts of interest in public administration, moves the timeframe for activity 5.2.1.1 under the AP PAR forward to Q4 2016, while activity AP PAR 5.2.1.5 under the Action Plan for Chapter 23 moves the timeframe forward to Q2 2017 based on activity 2.2.3.5 - Adoption of a law governing prevention of conflicts of interest of employees in public administration from item 2.2.3.4. Activity Amending the Law on the Anti-Corruption Agency in order to strengthen competencies, entrusted to Agency, in relation to monitoring of implementation of the provisions concerning: conflicts of interests, verification and cross-checking of information from assets declaration which have been delivered by the judicial office holders, moves the timeframe for activity 5.3.1.7 under the AP PAR forward from Q4 2015 to Q3 2016.Activity 2.2.11.2 - Amend the Law on State Administration as it pertains to transparency and cooperation with civil society organizations and other relevant legislation for the purpose of alignment of the standards of cooperation between state authorities and civil society with the Council of Europe standards and United Nations Convention against corruption in accordance with the performed analysis of deficiencies, moves the timeframe for activity 5.1.2.3 under the AP PAR forward from Q4 2015 to Q4 2016.Activities 3.2.1.2. Provide office space for adequate long-term placement of the Protector of Citizens and 3.2.1.3. Amend and supplement the Law on the Protector of Citizens to strengthen the independence and increase efficiency of the Protector of Citizens, in particular in his capacity as the National Preventive Mechanism, moves the timeframe for activities 5.3.1.1 and 5.3.1.2 under the AP PAR forward from Q3 2015 to Q4 2016 and also moves forward the timeframe for activities 4.2.4.2 and 4.2.4.3 under the AP PAR, since they pertain to amendments to the Law on the Protector of Citizens.In the Economic Reform Programme for the Period 2016-2018 (ERP), under the heading Priority Structural Reform 2: Improved Management of Capital Investments, the activity Conduct a pilot phase of the assessment of capital projects by budget beneficiaries and the Ministry of Finance is scheduled to be implemented from Q4 2016 to Q1 2017, while the activity Rate capital projects by budget beneficiaries and the Ministry of Finance is scheduled for implementation from Q2 2017 to Q5 2018, which moves forward the timeframe for implementation of activity 3.2.2.1 under the AP PAR, which was scheduled for Q3 2015. The Public Finance Management Reform Programme 2016-2020 moves forward the timeframe for these activities through Result 4.1: A single platform for capital projects planning and methodology for public investment analysis and planning established, activity: Evaluation of proposed public investment projects by budget beneficiaries and drafting an implementation plan, for which the scheduled timeframe is Q4 2016.Activity 3.2.2.2 under the AP PAR, which had been scheduled for Q3 2016, has been delayed due to the activity Monitoring the implementation of approved capital projects and proposing measures to improve the planning and implementation of public investment project under the Public Finance Management Reform Programme 2016-2020, and the new timeframe for implementation is Q2 2017.Under the same Programme, Result 11.3: Improved capacities of the Central Harmonisation Unit (CHU) / Activity: Conducting a functional review of the CHU in order to improve its organizational, technical and administrative capacities in order to raise its functionality for implementing all the defined activities which fall within its scope of competence, moves the timeframe for AP PAR activities 3.3.2.1 and 3.3.3.1 forward from Q4 2015 to Q4 2016.]

Out of the 156 activities for which inquiries were sent, 45 activities have been implemented, 50 have been partially implemented, 53 have not been implemented, while for 8 no reports have been provided. Of the 55 activities carried forward from 2015, 9 activities have been implemented, 27 have been partially implemented, 14 have not been implemented, while for 5 no reports have been provided.

Graph 4: Graph of all activities for which 2016 reports were requested

Graph 5: Graph of activities implemented in 2016

With regard to the 148 activities monitored in 2016, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government is the implementing institution responsible for 93 activities, or 80 activities without its subordinate bodies (the Electronic Administration Directorate is responsible for 11 activities, while the Administrative Inspectorate is responsible for 2 activities). The Ministry of Finance is responsible for implementing 24 activities, the Ministry of Justice is responsible for implementing 5 activities, the Anti-Corruption Agency is responsible for 1 activity, the General Secretariat is responsible for 4 activities, the Republic Secretariat for Public Policies is responsible for 14 activities, the Public Procurement Office is responsible for 6 activities and the Administration for Joint Services of Republic Bodies is responsible for 1 activity.

Graph 6: Graph of institutions responsible for implementation of activities in 2016

No.

State administration body

Total number of activities in 2016

Implemented

Partially implemented

Unimplemented

1.

Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government (with the Electronic Administration Directorate and the Administrative Inspectorate as its subordinate bodies)

93

27

25

41

Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government

80

20

22

38

Electronic Administration Directorate

11

6

2

3

Administrative Inspectorate

2

1

1

2.

Ministry of Finance

24

6

9

9

3.

Ministry of Justice

5

3

1

1

4.

Anti-Corruption Agency

1

1

5.

Republic Secretariat for Public Policies

14

1

12

1

6.

Public Procurement Office

6

6

7.

General Secretariat

4

1

2

1

8.

Administration for Joint Services of Republic Bodies

1

1

Total:

148

45

50

53

Percentage:

100%

30%

34%

36%

Table 2: Overview of the total number of activities and the status of their implementation by responsible institutions

Graph 7: Graph of implemented activities by responsible institutions under the AP PAR in 2016

II Key Achievements by Objectives

The reports submitted so far seem to indicate that progress has been made against the highest level of indicators set for the Action Plan on PAR defined for the overall goal of public administration reform Government Effectiveness, which measuers the long-term impact of PAR. According to the Government Effectiveness Report of the World Bank, which is published at the end of September every year in respect of the previous year and which measures the perceived quality of public services, the quality of public administration and its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy-making process and the Governments credibility and dedication to policy implementation, in 2014 Serbia progressed by 7 percentile ranks, from 51.18 to 58.17[footnoteRef:11], in just one year, which is an important indicator and a recognition of the efforts made in previous period. Serbia ranked the same rank in 2015 at 58.17 (on a scale of 0-100). [11: World Bank indicators: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#doc and http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/worldwide-governance-indicators ]

Furthermore, measured by the E-Government Development Index (EGDI) published by the United Nations/UNDESA, in 2016 Serbia progressed 30 places among 193 countries (from 69th in 2014 to 39th in 2016) and ranked as high as 17th in terms of -Participation. This UN survey analyses three dimensions in which citizens and businesses can benefit from online services and information: adequacy of telecommunications infrastructure, ability of human resources to promote and use IT and availability of online services and content.[footnoteRef:12] [12: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Data/Country-Information/id/151-Serbia ]

Similar success in 2016 was also achieved according to an international indicator that is not measured directly through the AP PAR, but is nevertheless relevant from the aspect of impact of reforms in the field of public administration and simplification of procedures, namely the World Banks Doing Business indicator, which ranked Serbia as 47th in 2016 (1-190), which was an additional improvement from 2015 (when Serbia ranked 54th after progressing 32 places from the previous year's list).[footnoteRef:13] Serbia achieved the greatest progress in issuing electronic building permits, shortening of the company incorporation process and simplification of the title transfer procedure. Serbia's progress in the World Bank's Doing Business list is a positive signal for potential investors who are considering Serbia as an investment destination. These two indicators combined are indicative of the level of attainment of the Overall Goal of AP PAR improving the work of public administration and providing high-quality services to citizens and the economy and creating a public administration that will significantly contribute to economic stability and a better standard of living. [13: For more information about this indicator and the Doing Business list, see: http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/serbia]

Figure 2: Taken from the UNDESA website, graphic representation of Serbias ranking according to the E-Government Development Index

With regard to the five objectives under the AP PAR, the highest number of activities in quantitative terms was implemented under the First Objective: Improve the organisational and functional subsystems of public administration.

Graph 8: Graph of implemented activities by each of the specific objectives under the AP PAR in the observed period by the end of Q2 2016

Indeed, of the 40 activities under the First Objective, 9 have been implemented, 16 have been partially implemented, while 14 activities have not been implemented and no information was provided in respect of 1 activity. Of those 40 activities, 7 are continual, while 18 have been carried forward from 2015 (and of those 18, 4 have been implemented, 9 have been partially implemented, 4 have not been implemented and no information has been provided in respect of 1 activity).

Public administration reform is one of the main elements of structural reforms in the public sector, in an effort to achieve long-term sustainability of public finance and establish a sound business environment. To ensure better organisation of public administration and improve the quality of services, while also taking into account the constraints imposed by fiscal consolidation, several processes have been continued in parallel in 2016:

I. The rightsizing process for the purposes of fiscal consolidation (stage I in the PA Optimisation Programme), which involves the following main activities:

Application of the Decision on the Maximum Number of Employees in the System of State Authorities, the System of Public Services, the System of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the Systems of Local Self-Governments for 2015, which was passed by the Government on 2 December 2015, through:

From the effective date of the ban on new hiring in the public sector (end of 2013) to the end of 2016, the result of the rightsizing process was 37,900 fewer employees in indefinite employment in public administration (including public utilities). Compared with December 2014, in December 2016 there were 24,150 fewer employees, which was significantly above the target agreed with the IMF. Furthermore, savings in the national budget due to the rightsizing process in 2016 (relative to 2015) were more than EUR 40 million.

reorganisation and

rationalisation of public administration,

Establishment of a monitoring and follow-up system for implementation of the Decision,

Conducting an independent evaluation of the overall optimisation process.

II. The optimisation and modernisation process (stage II of the PA Optimisation Programme), which includes the following activities:

Conducting functional analyses,

Defining recommendations for reorganisation and modernisation to increase efficiency and quality of services,

Development of an AP for implementation of the recommendations.

Within the framework of implementation of the Decision on the Maximum Number of Employees in the System of State Authorities, the System of Public Services, the System of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the Systems of Local Self-Governments for 2015 as it pertains to reorganisation, amendments have been made to internal organisation and job classification bylaws in respect of:

794 organisational forms (including 7 special organisations and Ministries with organisational forms within their respective spheres of competence other than education), as well as

1,607 organisational forms in the field of education (based on data provided by the Ministry of Education).

These figures do not include local self-government units and the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina.

As part of the rationalisation process, instructions for application of the Law on the Manner of Determining the Maximum Number of Employees in the Public Sector have been prepared, the Regulation on Classification of Posts and Criteria for Job Descriptions for Civil Servants has been amended, a monitoring and reporting system for the rationalisation process has been established, an internal team tasked with monitoring the rationalisation process has been formed, reporting rules (Instructions) have been developed, a mechanism for information gathering and reporting has been established and 3 reporting cycles have been completed, with reporting and monitoring periods set to match the IMF missions.

The number of employees as at 31 October 2016: the planned cuts in the first wave of rightsizing provided for by the Decision on the Maximum Number of Employees in the System of State Authorities, the System of Public Services, the System of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the Systems of Local Self-Governments for 2015 resulted in the lay-off of 14,512 employees, while the second wave of rightsizing, based on the agreement with the IMF for 2016, will see the departure of an additional 6,500 employees in indefinite employment in the general government[footnoteRef:14] and local public enterprises. The net change is a reduction of the number employees in indefinite employment by 24,150[footnoteRef:15] from 31 December 2014 to 31 December 2016, which includes staff reduction on all grounds[footnoteRef:16] (rightsizing (21%), retirement (40%) and other grounds (39%)). [14: General government includes all entities responsible for providing mainly non-market services and redistribution of revenue and wealth at all government levels; it includes the budget of the Republic of Serbia, local government budgets, non-budgetary funds, including social insurance funds at all government levels, as well as non-market and non-profit institutions controlled and funded by the state at all government levels.] [15: According to an analysis made by the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government based on data contained in the Central Register of Compulsory Social Insurance and the Register of Persons Employed, Elected, Nominated, Appointed and Hired in the Public Sector.] [16: Communications sent by line Ministries and local self-government units (LSGUs) to the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government as at 31 August 2016 (does not include data for the education sector, the Governments Services and certain institutions in the health sector and LSGUs which did not provide data).]

The current ratio of general government employees is 6,5 per 100 inhabitants, while the average for new EU Member States is 8 and for the whole EU the average is 8.5 employees per 100 inhabitants. At the central level, the number of employees has been reduced by 15,800. Of that number, the three largest sectors accounted for more than 11,400: health accounted for 7,000, education accounted for 2,150 and internal affairs accounted for 2,300. At the local level, the number of employees has been reduced by 8,350. As many as 94%3 of local self-governments have reduced the number of their employees to the ceiling set by the Decision and the 10 largest ones accounted for 50% of the total reduction.

Salary expenses at the general government level (gross 1) in 2016 were 2.1% lower than in 2015, or EUR 60, after offsetting the expenses incurred as a result of salary increases and payment of rewards and severance pays in the rightsizing process. Of that, net structural savings were more than EUR 40 million, while the remainder were taxes and contributions, which, while reducing expenses, also had the effect of reducing revenue and therefore do not constitute net savings.

This year, the Commission on New Employment and Additional Hiring by Beneficiaries of Public Fund approved almost twice fewer requests than last year. In 2015 there were 2,545 approved requests for new indefinite employment in general government, while in 2016, as at 26 October, the Commission approved the hiring of 1,360 employees in indefinite employment.

As regards the outsourcing of monitoring activities, a public call for bids was announced in accordance with the Law on Public Procurement and an external evaluator was hired (Centre for Investment and Finance CIF). The evaluator was required to submit a report on implementation of the Law and the Decision determining the Maximum Number of Employees within six months. In the period February-August 2016, CIF was tasked with monitoring, analysing and notifying the stakeholders and the general public on the implementation of the rationalisation process. The results of this work are only partially available at: http://www.pracenjereformi.info/.

Stage II of the PA Optimisation Programme, under the project Restructuring and Optimisation of Public Administration in the Republic of Serbia, which is funded under IPA 2014 and implemented with the support of the World Bank, included the completion of the first stage of horizontal functional analysis of 94 centre of government institutions and a functional analysis of the portfolio of the Ministry of Finance. Reports with recommendations have been compiled and the Action Plans on implementation of the recommendations have been prepared. A preliminary functional analysis of the provision of services in the fields of health, education and social security has been conducted, preliminary findings have been prepared and a methodology for vertical functional analysis of the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment Protection has been designed and harmonised and its development is currently underway. These reports are expected to be completed by April 2017.

The horizontal functional review has identified all organisational forms, as well as functions broken down by all types of organisational forms, job classification, and number of employees, staffing levels of the scheduled posts and the share of employees by functions and by management levels. The horizontal FR has produced a cost-benefit analysis tool which will support the decision-making process. Inputs for optimistic and pessimistic scenarios for the transformation of ancillary functions at the central government level have also been defined on the basis of the horizontal FR. This tool will be used in the preparation of the negotiation process for passing the Decision determining the Maximum Number of Employees in 2017. At the end of 2016, a Summary Report of Horizontal Functional Review was compiled, which summarised all FR findings and aims to point, in a synthetic way, to key structural deficiencies in the organisation of central government which harm efficiency in the provision of services, while at the same time also increasing the wage bill; it also includes a proposal and overview of short-, medium- and long-term policy measures and recommendations which lay the foundations for long-term structural transformation of the central government. The Action plans for the implementation of the horizontal and vertical FR of the Ministry of Finance were endorsed at the PAR Council meeting in December 2016.

To include the general public and stakeholders in the consultative process of determining the directions for key reforms of public services, approaches, policies and behaviour in the priority areas of public administration, namely state administration, local self-government, health care, education, judiciary and financial discipline, the MPALSG cooperated with the Centre for Applied European Studies and, with the support of the Open Society Fund, implemented the project A State Tailored to its Citizens What Kind of a State do we want in the Future? from February to June 2016. There were 6 planned expert meetings with the most relevant experts in the fields of: local self-government, state administration, health care, education, judiciary and financial discipline. Finalisation of a vision document, with findings and recommendations from the expert meetings, is currently underway. The aim was to establish dialogue between key stakeholders and to facilitate reaching a consensus on change driven by citizens needs, while ensuring that the existing human, structural and financial resources are used cost-efficiently and sustainably. The results of this project are an important part of the reform process and visioning of public administration and provide a baseline for the establishment of a continual process of active involvement of stakeholders in addressing key issues of public interest. The entire process can be followed at: http://www.mduls.gov.rs/zajedno-u-promene.php

Activities undertaken under the First Objective also included those aimed at improving the planning process in state administration bodies: the RSPP prepared a proposal for a package of regulations, which includes a working draft of the Law on Planning System in the RS and two supporting regulations the Regulation on Medium-Term Planning and the Regulation on Public Policy Management, Analysis of Effects of Public Policies and Regulations and Content of Individual Public Policy Documents, which will regulate the planning system in Serbia and management of the public policy system. In parallel with the development of this package of regulations, the RSPP has been working on establishing a strategic framework for the public policy management system and regulatory reform and, after months of stakeholder consultations and a public debate, it prepared the Strategy of Regulatory Reform and Improvement of the Public Policy Management System for the Period 2016-2020, as well as the Action Plan for its implementation in 2016-2017, both of which were adopted in January 2016. The main goal of the Strategy is to carry out a comprehensive reform of the public policy management system (planning, analysis, designing, passing, implementation monitoring, valuation and coordination of public policies) by 2020, as well as to continually implement regulatory reform mechanisms in order to improve the quality of regulations and instruments of public policy implementation, which in turn would improve the quality of those public policies. Furthermore, the RSPP cooperated with state administration bodies to prepare the Action Plan on Implementation of the Governments Programme, in order to strengthen the mechanisms for managing priorities in the Governments work and achieve and monitor priority objectives on the basis of the defined results and interim results that have to be achieved within the specified timeframe. The Action Plan on Implementation of the Governments Programme was adopted on 17 November 2016 and it was based on the priorities defined in the Governments Programme of 11 August 2016. Those priorities are categorised into four areas, each of which is covered by a relevant ministerial group, as follows: 1. Serbias association with Europe and the world, 2. Creation of economic opportunities for all, 3. Provision of better public services and 4. Protection of human rights and security.

In the field of e-Government, Electronic services based on the Central Registry of Compulsory Social Insurance and the Registry of Registry Records have been established for the registration of new-born babies and enrolment of children in preschool institutions (as well as for issuing of certificates that children are not enrolled in such institutions).

In 2016, the number of accounts on the eGovernment portal (www.euprava.gov.rs) increased by a record-breaking 145%. With 350,000 new accounts, this website currently has more than 590,000 active users.

In the past 12 months, 160 new services have been designed. In addition to these, the Portal currently provides access to 710 different services advertised by 143 state bodies.

The most popular services in 2016 were the three new ones: electronic replacement of old health insurance booklets with new health insurance cards, eBaby and online enrolment of children in nurseries. Apart from these services, citizens mostly used the eGovernment Portal for obtaining birth certificates and citizenship certificates, as well as to report issues to competent institutions.

The electronic replacement of old health insurance booklets with new health insurance cards on the eGovernment Portal, which began in November last year, has been a runaway success in less than three months, this service was used by more than 200,000 Serbian citizens. This service enabled to the citizens in Serbia for the first time the option to choose their document to be delivered to the home address (in this case, health insurance card) which is a significant step forward in providing the best possible services to the citizens.

The national eGovernment Portal has been available to the public since June 2010 as the simplest way to reduce queueing and avoid corruption, while at the same time also increasing transparency and efficiency of work. Notwithstanding the absence of laws that would regulate the area of e-government and the shortage of funds, the number of cities/towns and municipalities, as well as citizens and businesses, that use the Portal has been increasing constantly.

Applications available on the eGovernment Portal and the service of online enrolment of children in nurseries, available since May last year, have been filed by more than 10,000 parents in the territory of Belgrade. At least three documents that previously had to be obtained from different clerks have been replaced by a single form.

The project Welcome to the World, Baby! (e-baby), which allows parents to register a new-born child in just 15 minutes, gained traction in 2016 and by the end of 2016 was available in 47 maternity clinics in Serbia. Today, this service is available in all maternity clinics in our country. So far, more than 16,000 babies have been registered in this way and about seven different papers are no longer required.

As regards the Second Objective: Establishing a balanced, merit-based public service system and improving HR management, of the 31 planned activities, 4 have been implemented, 10 have been partially implemented, while 17 activities have not been implemented. Of the 31 activities, 1 is continual, while 16 have been carried forward from 2015 (and of those 16, 4 activities have been implemented, 9 have been partially implemented, while 2 have not been implemented).

BODY

EMPLOYEES IN INDEFINITE EMPLOYMENT

APPRENTICES

Total

Officials

Employees

Jan 2016

Dec 2016

Jan 2016

Dec 2016

Jan 2016

Dec 2016

Jan 2016

Dec 2016

MINISTRIES

18169

17630

181

180

17988

17450

4

9

SPECIAL ORGANISATIONS

3637

3676

64

68

3573

3608

0

0

GOVERNMENTS SERVICES

1193

1163

48

54

1145

1109

1

1

TECHNICAL SERVICES OF ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICTS

238

220

0

0

238

220

0

0

TOTAL

23237

22689

293

302

2944

22387

5

10

Table 3: Comparative Overview obtained from the HRMS for the total number of employees in indefinite employment and apprentices in state administration in the period January-December 2016

Regarding result 2.1.1 - Coordinated labour-law status of employees in all areas of public administration, with the goal of strengthening of implementation of principles of de-politicisation and professionalization, i.e. establishment of a merit-based system, an analysis has been conducted of the positive regulations which govern the labour law status of employees in all parts of public administration in the Republic of Serbia, with recommendations for establishing a harmonised labour law status of employees in public administration. A Decision was passed and a Special Working Group was formed on 5 May 2016 to propose recruitment and staff retention measures for the state administration system. The Working Group comprises representatives of 10 institutions and has so far held one meeting.

GENDER STRUCTURE CIVIL SERVANTS

TOTAL NUMBER OF CIVIL SERVANTS

CIVIL SERVANTS ON MANAGERIAL POSITIONS LOWER THAN GENERAL DIRECTOR (heads of departmens, chiefs of divisions, heads of groups)

POSSITIONS

Ministries

Special organisations

Services of the Govenment

Total

Women

61%

51%

43%

37%

42%

41%

Men

39%

49%

57%

63%

58%

59%

Table 4: Data from HRMS Register on the gender structure of the civil servants by March 2017

The Law on Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units (Official Gazette of RS No. 21/16) was enacted in March 2016. This Law is the first legislative text to comprehensively regulate the employment system in Autonomous Provinces and local self-government units, with the aim of establishing the basic principles of the civil service system based on the standards accepted in modern comparable legal systems, thus providing the main assumption for full professionalization and depoliticization of staff in Autonomous Provinces and local self-government units. Implementing regulations passed pursuant to this Law in 2016 include the Regulation on the Criteria for Job Classification and the Criteria for Job Description for Civil Servants in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units, the Regulation on the Criteria for Job Classification and the Criteria for Job Description for Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units and the Regulation on Internal and Public Job Announcements in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units. The Decision on the Formation of Professional Development Councils at Local Self-Government Units (Official Gazette of RS No. 105/16 has been passed).

With the Law on Employees in Autonomous Provinces and Local Self-Government Units, the civil service system (i.e. the principles and norms of professional administrative apparatus) has been expanded from 23,237 civil servants in the state level administration and government services to 29,818 employees more in the AP and JLS.

As regards result 2.3.1 System fundamentals for the general training of employees in public administration bodies and organisations established, the process of preparation and formation of the Central Training Institution has seen the initiation of certain ac