the presidency department of performance monitoring and evaluation

The Presidency The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and EvaluationDepartment of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

Portfolio Committee on Energy 2012 Final scores

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and EvaluationThe Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

Why?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 challenges 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, contributing

to poor municipal service delivery Develop a culture of continuous improvement and sharing of

good practice Link institutional performance to individual assessment of HoD

2


How?How? Assessment is against 31 management standards, in 17

management areas (developed collaboratively with DPSA, NT and Offices of the Premier)

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)

DPME facilitates national departments, OTPs facilitates provincial departments

3

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and EvaluationThe Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation 44

Self-assessment;

validation

External moderation

and feedback

Improve and monitor

Senior management

agree on scores

Internal Audit certify process

and verify evidence

HOD sign off

External Moderation

DPME/OTP feedback to department

Departmental improvement

plans

Department monitors

implementation

Department prepares for next round

Have we improved

from baseline?


MPAT 2012/13 Implementation ProcessMPAT 2012/13 Implementation Process

Self Assessment Closing date 30 September extended to 23 November 2012 DPME and Premiers Offices provided hands on support to

departments to upload evidence

Moderation 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 (26 – 30 November 2012) Feedback was provided to departments on 21 January 2013 Final scores were communicated to departments 23/25 April 2013

with a request to indicate if clarity is required by 10 May 2013

55


MPAT RatingsMPAT Ratings

66

Level Description

Level 1 Non-compliance with legal/regulatory requirements

Level 2 Partial compliance with legal/regulatory requirements

Level 3 Full compliance with legal/regulatory requirements

Level 4 Full compliance and doing things smartly


1.3 Performance Area: Monitoring and Evaluation1.3.1 Standard name: Integration of monitoring and evaluation in performance and strategic managementStandard definition: The department’s ability to do monitoring and evaluation, produce useful and reliable information, and use performance information in performance and strategic management.Standards Evidence Documents LevelDepartment 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


2.3 Performance Area: Accountability2.3.2 Standard name: Assessment of accountability mechanisms (Audit Committee) Standard definition: Departments have a properly constituted Audit Committee (or shared Audit Committee) that functions in terms of Treasury requirements.Standards Evidence Documents LevelDepartment does not have an audit committee in place.

Level 1

Department has an audit committee in place that is constituted in according to Treasury requirements.

Appointment letters or agreement for shared audit committee

Level 2

Audit committee meets as scheduled.

Audit Committee has an Audit Charter with clearly defined objectives and key performance indicators

Approved minutes of last 3 Audit Committee meetings

Audit Charter signed by the Chairperson of the Audit Committee and the Accounting Officer

Report(s) by Chairperson of Audit Committee.

Three year internal audit plan approved by Audit Committee.

Level 3

Level 3 plus:

Audit Committee review management responses to audit issues and reports thereon

Assessment of Audit committee by stakeholders

Level 3 plus:

Minutes of last 3 audit committee meetings

Report(s) by Chairperson of Audit Committee on management responses

Copy of the assessment report of Audit Committee by stakeholders

Level 4


ND Energy vs RSA Total MPAT 2012 Final ScoresND Energy vs RSA Total MPAT 2012 Final Scores

99


ND Police MPAT 2012 Final Scores per KPAND Police MPAT 2012 Final Scores per KPA Strategic management is the comprehensive collection of on-going activities

and processes to systematically coordinate and align resources and actions with mission, vision and strategy throughout the organisation The Department performed at 100% in meeting all requirements of level 3

and 4. The department, furthermore perform above sectoral and national averages but must put more effort in to move all performance standards to level 4, particularly Annual Performance Plans

Effective Governance and Accountability are necessary to ensure that adequate checks and balances are in place to minimise mismanagement and corruption and also improve efficiencies in delivery of services The Department does not meet 55 % of the legal requirements and urgent

attention is required to ensure the department at least meet the legal requirements

1010


MPAT 2012 Final Scores per KPA …ContMPAT 2012 Final Scores per KPA …Cont

Human Resource Management practices has a profound influence on the overall performance of the organisation, and in the delivery of services a significant proportion of the Government’s budget is spent on human resources, and it is therefore imperative that the state derives value for money from the investment in human resources in the public sector The Department met 60 % of the legal requirements and must ensure that

legal requirements are met in the remaining 40% of the standards

Financial Management determine the extent to which managers ensure effective and efficient use of public funds to ensure growth & development of the country The Department met 57% of the legal requirements, but should focus

attention on improving the remaining 43% to meet the legal requirements and strive to move all performance standards to level 4

1111


ND Energy Final Scores per Performance StandardND Energy Final Scores per Performance Standard

1212


ND Energy Final Scores per Performance Standard ND Energy Final Scores per Performance Standard continue….continue….

1313


ND Energy Final Scores per Performance Standard ND Energy Final Scores per Performance Standard continue….continue….

1414


ND Energy Final Scores per Performance AreaND Energy Final Scores per Performance Area Observed strengths (Level 4):

Strategic Plans Monitoring and Evaluation Human Resource Development Planning Management of Diversity

Observed weaknesses (Level 1): Service Delivery Improvement Mechanisms Assessment of Accountability mechanism (Audit Committee) Management of Disciplinary Cases

1515


Improving Management PerformanceImproving Management Performance

1616


Value add of this processValue 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

1717


Value add… contValue 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

1818


Ke ya lebogaKe a leboha

Ke a lebogaNgiyabonga

Ndiyabulela Ngiyathokoza

NgiyabongaInkomu

Ndi khou livhuhaDankie

Thank you

1919

the presidency department of performance monitoring and evaluation

Documents

performance information

performance area

asset management

facilities management

management areas

management standards

integration of monitoring

national departments