Overview of Monitoring and Evaluation in South Africa

15 November 2011

The Presidency, Republic of South Africa Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

Overview of Monitoring and Evaluation in South Africa

Jabu Mathe

The Presidency, Republic of South Africa

The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

1 Background

South Africa is a medium-sized country with a population of around 50 million people.

Unitary state with 3 spheres of government - 47 national depts, 9 provinces, and 278 local governments.

One party in power since first democratic elections in 1994 (ANC), different currents within it, and strengthening opposition leading to political pressure.

The 2009 elections a political watershed within the governing party leading to changing direction in a number of areas including:

2


Background (Cont) focus on outcomes rather than outputs, so moving government

towards an impact-oriented rather than an output/activity-oriented culture.

Focus on change agenda with 12 cross-gov outcomes building on election manifesto, and focus on education, health, reducing crime, rural development and job creation;

Establishment of Dept of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) in the Presidency to drive the process, with Minister/Deputy Minister providing support roles for President;

Establishment of National Planning Commission as advisory body with responsibility of long-term development plan;

Support facility to strengthen evidence-based policy making in government through Programme to Support Pro-Poor Policy Development (PSPPD) assists with learning process.

3


The 12 National Outcomes Quality basic education

A long and healthy life for all South Africans

All people in South Africa are and feel safe

Decent employment through inclusive economic growth

Skilled and capable workforce to support an inclusive growth path

An efficient, competitive and responsive economic infrastructure network

Vibrant, equitable, sustainable rural communities contributing towards food security for all

Sustainable human settlements and improved quality of household life

Responsive, accountable, effective and efficient Local Government system

Protect and enhance our environmental assets and natural resources

Create a better South Africa, a better Africa and a better world

An efficient, effective and development oriented public service and an empowered, fair and inclusive citizenship

4


2 Architecture

5

Organisation Role

Department of Performance

Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME)

Custodian of M&E function. Includes:

· Outcomes approach (planning and monitoring)

· Government-wide M&E System (GWMES) - standard setting, quality assurance, capacity building and technical assistance, promotion of the use of M&E

National Planning

Commission

Advisory body drawing up long-term development plan

Equivalent of the above in provinces is the Office of the Premier

Provinces and

municipalities

Develop their own plans, implement and monitor them

Dept of Cooperative Governance

M&E of local government

National Treasury

(and provincial

treasuries)

· Custodian of departmental plans and responsible for monitoring them (quarterly

and annually) so custodian of the ‘sustained’ agenda

· Custodian of budgeting and expenditure monitoring (3 year, annual)

DPSA Responsible for structure and performance of the public service.

Public Service

Commission

Independent role in the evaluation process, reporting to Parliament

Auditor-General Independent body, conducts financial/performance audit of all government structures


3 Implementation

6

2005 GWM&E produced by Presidency; 2007 GWMES Policy Framework adopted and approved by cabinet in

2007; May 2009 New President elected - adopts M&E as key driver of improving

effectiveness of government; Sept 2009 Outcomes approach adopted (Policy Framework approved by

cabinet) May 09 to Jan 2010 Small team put together diagnosis, priority outcomes, and

key targets & agreed on 12 outcomes, from education to rural development;

April 2010 Appointment of new DG in new dept in Presidency - DPME. Small team work on Ministers’ performance agreements;

April/May 2010 Ministers’ performance agreements signed with President; July 10-Jan 2011 First outcome facilitators appointed, to facilitate taking forward

each outcome; July-Sept 2010 Implementation Forums established & hold meet to coordinate implementation of outcomes Sep 2010 Delivery agreements signed to implement the outcomes; ;


Implementation (2)

Aug 2010 President meets ministers to review progress with outcomes;

Oct 2010 First quarterly report, using traffic light approach and focusing on problem-solving;

Data forums established to iron out data quality issues;

Early 2011 Evaluation policy taking long time to emerge June/July 2011 Study tour to Mexico/Colombia focuses on

evaluation. Provides very valuable examples plus evidence around integrated planning/budget/M&E

Aug 2011 Draft Evaluation Policy Framework produced Nov 2011 IT system (PoA) comes online as the backbone of the

system. First evaluation started Nov 2011 Evaluation Policy Framework goes to Cabinet.

7


Implementation (Summary)

8

Development of high level outcomes,

outputs, activities and metrics Develop and implement detailed

inputs, outputs, activities, metrics

and roles and responsibilities Ruling Party election

Manifesto: 5 priority areas

Negotiate detailed inputs, activities,

metrics, roles & responsibilities

12 strategic outcomes

(based on consultation process)

Establish Implementation Forum

Coordinate implementation

Delivery Agreements between

stakeholders

Performance Agreements with

Minister(s)

• Based on outcomes

• High level outputs, indicators,

targets and activities per outcome

• Request to work together in

Implementation Forum

to produce a Delivery Agreement

per outcome

Monitor and evaluate

Feed back loop to annual revisions

of Delivery Agreements

Step 2 (Done)

Step 3 Nov 2010

Step 4 ongoing

Step 1 (Done)


3. Change Management Started with top-down led outcomes approach

DPME having to carve its niche – some resistance from other departments

Departments initially make outcomes plans too complex – seek to incorporate their business-as-usual plans into the change plans

Move to developing collaborative approaches with national government, as well as with provincial government Seek to develop incentives of supporting depts to improve delivery

Study tours provide incentive and opportunity to learn from others and build common understanding of problems and opportunities

Work with centre of government on diagnosing problems in integrated planning/budget/M&E system

Work in collaborative way to develop MPAT and evaluation policy framework

Need to revise delivery agreements to overcome some challenges from initial versions. Seek to get get outcomes more focused on strategic drivers and limited set of indicators

Need to get data system working and PoA for credibility of system – data forums focus on data issue - IT system about to go live in November 2011

9


4. Tools and Services Outcomes

Performance Agreements with Ministers

Delivery Agreements (compiled by stakeholders per outcome)

Implementation Forums established to coordinate and monitor delivery agreements

sectoral data forums to discuss, collect data re the outcomes

PoA IT system to record delivery agreements and progress

Institutional performance monitoring - Management performance Assessment Tool, (MPAT); Phase 1 20 National Depts. and 20 Provincial Depts. Use secondary data from existing tools, Auditor- General, OPSC, etc, to partially populate report card & present results to Cabinet and Provincial Executive Councils.

National evaluation system: National Evaluation Policy Framework to cabinet ; a technical unit established to the system; practice notes and guidelines; National Evaluation Plan; 4 evaluations started.

Monitoring of front-line services developed in partnership with provincial Offices of Premier. Piloted in 3 provinces. Developing concept for citizen-based monitoring.

Supporting President on visits across the country, and troubleshooting problem areas

Head of Department Assessment – assesses HOD performance

Presidential Hotline – complaint and follow-up system

Initiating a cross government programme to build M&E capacity;

10


5. How are Products/Services used?

Early days still in all areas.

Outcomes reports – being used to focus on outcomes, problem areas identified – delivery agreements to be reviewed.

Showing responsiveness Front-line service delivery monitoring – raises profile of

Presidency and Offices of Premier – gives feedback, shows presence

Supporting President on trouble-shooting – Presidential visits

Hot-line – investigations & interventions on some cases

Evaluations – supporting depts to improve performance

MPAT – identifying departments with problems

11


6. Conclusion

Overall, South Africa is taking forward performance monitoring and evaluation vigorously with the Department (DPME) only created in April 2010.

This is not just a technocratic response as a form of New Public Management, but a serious attempt to improve the effectiveness and responsiveness of government. There is still a lot to learn – but we are on the road.

12


Thank You

Go to http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/dpme.asp

for PME documents

You can contact us at: [email protected]

13

http://www.thepresidency/

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Overview of Monitoring and Evaluation in South Africa