The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

1. The Presidency Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT TOOL (MPAT) Portfolio Committee on Economic Development 27 March 2013

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

3. Background • MPAT first implemented in the 2011/12 financial year, after Cabinet approval to annually assess national and provincial departments using MPAT– Based on international experience (Canada, Kenya, New Zealand) where Office of President or Premier assesses management practices with aim of driving improvements through competition and sharing of good practice • 103 out of 158 departments participated in the first round of assessments • 2011/12 self-assessment results for national departments have been published on the DPME website • Important base-line established • Many departments have implemented improvements as a result of this initial assessment • For 2012/13 all (156) national and provincial departments participated in assessment

4. How? • Assessment is against 31 management standards, in 17 management areas • Standards based on legislation and regulations • Standards developed collaboratively (with National Treasury, DPSA, Office of the Public Service Commission, Office of the Auditor General and Offices of the Premier) • Joint initiative with Offices of the Premier – DPME facilitates national departments, OoP facilitates provincial departments

5. Self-assessment; validation External moderation and feedback Improve and monitor Department improvement plan DPME/OOP feedback to department Senior management agree score Department monitors Internal Audit certify process and evidence External Moderation Department prepares for next round HOD sign off Have we improved from baseline?

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

7. MPAT ratings

10. Improving management performance • In most management areas some departments have been able to reach level 4 • This means that it is possible for all departments to reach level 4 • DPME has developed good practice case studies of level 4 performance in various management areas • Case studies have been documented independently and available on www.goodxample.org • Focused workshops on the case studies are been held with departments • Aim is to encourage departments to learn from each other • New case studies currently been finalised • DPME, DPSA and NT offer support to departments to improve management practices

11. Self-assessment scores for 2011/12

16. Final moderated scores for 2012/13

17. For strategic management the department has shown improvements from their previous self-assessment rating

18. For Governance, other than the functioning of the Audit Committee and internal audit, the department is below compliance • SDIP is one area in which compliance across all departments is low, review of policy and/or support from DPSA must be prioritised • New DPSA requirements for the Governance of ICT may contribute to overall low scores in this area

19. For Human Resource Management the department is below compliance on all standards except for Pay sheet certification and the HOD PMDS • The requirements for reporting on diversity within departments were not well known and therefore the performance in this area was low across all departments • The standard for management of disciplinary cases includes the adherence that cautionary suspension should not exceed 60 day and cases are finalised within 90 days of identification, most departments do not adhere to this

20. For Financial Management the department is at a compliance level for all standards

21. Conclusions and Recommendation regarding EDD 2012/13 MPAT assessments • Significant improvements in strategic and financial management are evident and the department is at a compliant level for these KPAs • To get to level 4, management needs to be more proactive in acting on data and information it generates • Improvement plans of the department should focus on Governance and Accountability and Human Resource Management to get to a compliance level at minimum • DPME has provided feedback to the department regarding their moderated scores and is aware of plans and improvements already in place that should impact positively on the EDD next assessment

22. Value add of this process • MPAT provides a single holistic picture of the state of a department • Generally audits focus on compliance only, whereas MPAT focuses on getting managers to work more smartly • MPAT also covers a broader range of management areas than audits cover • Getting all departments to level 4 will improve levels and quality of service delivery • For example getting departments to procure smartly would result in better service delivery by suppliers and contractors, and savings from reducing corruption and increasing value for money

23. Value add… cont • The process of getting top management as a whole to assess itself against a holistic set of good practice management standards and to agree on required improvements is the main value add of the MPAT assessment process • Management practices in departments are generally weak because top management has not paid sufficient attention to improving them • By carrying out annual MPAT assessments the Presidency and the Offices of the Premier are sending out a clear message that improving administration is a priority of government

24. Limitations of this process • MPAT focuses on processes related to converting inputs into outputs • Does not focus on assessing whether the right outputs are been produced to achieved desired outcomes and impacts • Risk that departments may be producing the wrong outputs very efficiently and effectively • In viewing the overall performance of a department it is therefore also important to consider the achievement of outcomes and impacts • DPME is doing this through monitoring of the 12 priority outcomes and related delivery agreements • Departments’ performance against targets for outcome and impact indicators in their strategic plans and APPs, as reported in their annual reports, should also be used to assess this

25. Ke ya leboga Ke a leboha Ke a leboga Ngiyabonga Ndiyabulela Ngiyathokoza Ngiyabonga Inkomu Ndi khou livhuha Dankie Thank you