Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration
(Supplement to the Powerpoint Presentation)
19 February 2003
Department of Public Service and Administration

Introduction

The 2003 programme of the Portfolio Committee provided a slot for the DPSA to make a presentation on Poverty Alleviation Interventions in the Public Service. The DPSA subsequently requested that the topic be pitched around support to service delivery institutions. This is based on the understanding that a major part of the Department’s work that relates to institution building is actually a key vehicle towards supporting poverty alleviation through improved service provision. Most of these institutions serve as the actual interface between government and the public in terms of service provision and unless they have the strategic and administrative capacity to function, government’s programme of creating a better life for all would get compromised. This applies whether one talks about the provision of social security, creation of jobs through extended public works programmes or the provision of nutritional food supplements to school learners.

Indeed, even in instances where other agencies outside of government are partnered with to deliver services, government institutions still have to play a crucial role in contract management, oversight and overall accountability.

Against this background, and based on lessons from previous efforts, the Department has developed a strategy for institutional support.

Various service delivery analyses indicate that there are certain underlying factors that often explain why institutions are not able to deliver services. The strategy used by DPSA uses some of these key underlying factors as a starting base before considering what needs to be done to strengthen the institutions. The factors are summarised below.

• A number of managers may be in acting positions, creating uncertainty, inadequate commitment to efforts that have long-term implications, increased prospects for lack of continuity, and so on
• There may also be limited delegations to managers (especially when one looks at the dynamic between ‘Head Office Managers’ and ‘Operational Managers" at the level of service delivery institutions
• Management posts that are vacant for long
• Poor selection of managers, where in some instances the facility of competency assessment is not optimally used. In addition, even the training opportunities that get created do not end up adding sufficient value to the capacity requirements of the institution

• Insufficient integrated human resource management, not integrating human resource planning and management with other strategic processes of the institution – such as strategic planning and service delivery planning. Not uncommon to have a human resource plan that is developed separately from and is unrelated to the service delivery improvement plan.
• Posts that are not matched in both number and level to the service delivery needs of the organisation
• Poor performance management and management of system of rewards and incentives
• Many posts that stay vacant for long
• Poor culture of service

• Often such institutions manifest gaps between planning (including budgeting) for service delivery and actual implementation
• Plans are not sufficiently embedded in task execution and gaps thus exist between planning in head office and implementation by front-line managers
• Disjuncture thus exists between strategic and operational plans
• This impacts on the capacity to make informed spending choices and to allocate adequate resources in line with service delivery needs
• Capacity is thus often under- or overestimated, leading to inappropriate service standards
• Not enough functioning redress mechanisms to establish and deal with cases where citizens are not happy with the service they get. Institutions thus settle into a cruising mode of poor service delivery without feeling the pressure from service users to get their act together

• Service delivery value chains are not adequately managed, and sometimes there is even a lack of appreciation of their nature and extent
• The effective management of different key role players, the management of interdependencies and the regular interface between operational managers and top decision makers are not sufficiently institutionalised
• The management of assets like infrastructure, transport, accommodation (including maintenance and replenishment) is poor
• Back-office processes that support service delivery (e.g procurement) are not optimal
• Processes, procedures and operational cycles are not sufficiently documented and readily accessible to staff

• Basic administration (as a support base for service delivery) is often lacking. The keeping and updating of human resource records, financial records, service users records, etc is not adequate.

• Often, there are misperceptions and lack of knowledge about the regulatory framework of government – leading to delays in turn-around time and compromises in the quality of service delivery
• Some regulatory requirements result in conflicting or duplicative requirements being placed on managers of institutions
• The difficulties that institutions have in this area are sometimes evident in the reports of the Auditor-General and internal audit reports.

• Service delivery standards are not well articulated, and even they are, performance against the standards is not sufficiently monitored and reported in a coherent manner
• The quality of information provided in service delivery improvement plans and annual reports can be poor and the two documents are not sufficiently linked.
• There is no pro-active monitoring of services to predict whether service delivery might decline or fall (early warning indicators)

There are thus at least four fundamental imperatives to keep in mind in dealing with the service delivery challenges of institutions:

• Services need to be delivered in line with government’s policy and legislative framework
• Services need to be delivered in an integrated manner – both vertical (across spheres of government) and horizontal (within spheres and institutions) integration.
• Service standards need to be monitored to establish if they are being met in a sustainable manner
• Beyond simple monitoring the standards, institutions have to evaluate whether they are contributing sufficiently to broader goals of government, such as meeting basic needs, nation building and democratisation

Our strategic approach thus advocates that there are three critical elements that need consideration

• Proper monitoring to identify areas of weakness in institutions (this goes beyond the narrow view of assuming that ‘capacity’ refers to ‘skills’ of staff)
• Provision of direct support to the institutions that manifest these weaknesses. Where necessary, such support could even involve the rapid deployment of multidisciplinary teams, secondment of competent staff from other institutions, contract appointments and mentorships
• Provision of indirect that ensures that there are enabling frameworks that create a conducive environment in which institutional performance can flourish

The following are some of the key initiatives that the Department has embarked on:
Development of an Early Warning on Service Delivery

What are the indicators that service delivery may collapse or be slowed down (For instance, could these be: vacancies/turn-over rates of critical staff/number and level of suspensions/discrepancy between actual and planned service delivery/maintenance and replenishment of assets/ Over/under spending, etc)

• Supporting acceleration of social grants registrations (initial emphasis on Child Support grants) in the E Cape through alternative institutional arrangements (mobile units). Target of 425 000 registrations by April 2003
• Supporting establishment of a Social Grants Agency to ensure effective and efficient grant processing. This would help give effect to the Department of Social Development’s principle of paying the right person the right amount at the right time.
• Support improved Social Development Services through a Community Service on Wheels Facility (to start in Peddie, Craddock, and Mt Frere). This is another alternative institutional arrangement to ensure that quality services can be accessed.
• Mobile SAPS facility in Limpopo, already serving a number of communities in the former Venda and Lebowa areas
• Transformed business processes accompanied by targeted training, delegations, performance management, and project management methods in Limpopo Public Works. Work in this area has led to improved productivity and efficiency in the District (Waterberg). Current focus is on phasing this into other districts of the Province
• Initiation of a Red Tape Audit – to identify and propose ways of streamlining processes, procedures and practices that inhibit service delivery (e.g convoluted approval processes)
• Eastern Cape Intervention (under principalship of the President and Premier, taking a set number of departments and embarking on holistic turn around interventions
• Improved institutional arrangements for the provision of nutritional food supplements to school learners in the Thabo Mofutsanyane development node in the Free State. Commendable work on integrating all key initiatives involving food products is underway. Includes establishing a sustainable local food market to serve the nutrition scheme. Notably, the initiative is bringing together players from different spheres of government and aligning their work to the IDP processes. The

• Improved institutional arrangements and capacity at the Basotho Cultural Village (Thabo Mofutsanyane) so that disadvantaged craftsmen/women and artists can be supported. A Crafter’s Forum has been established and institutionalised (with constitution and Bank Account). The Forum is coordinating the efforts of local craftsmen/women so that with the support of government, their industry could thrive. For instance, craft and art products to the value of R345 000 were sold on behalf of the local crafters. These were sold at functions such WSSD, Macufe Festival, etc.

• Supporting turn around of selected hospitals in Limpopo towards better service delivery (Maphuta Malatjie and Letaba Hospitals).
• Review of Public Entities as part of government’s machinery of service delivery (the logic of differentiation between different government institutions through which services are provided).
• Improving institutional capacity through sound learning and knowledge management. Facilitates access to best practice, obviates duplication of efforts, creates opportunities for ‘leap-frogging’, improves institutional memory

The above initiatives have been cited for illustrative purposes. There are others in the DPSA business plan which also accord with this strategy although they may have been designed before it was formally introduced. These include:

• The restructuring of the public service in line with Resolution 7 of 2002.(ensuring that departments have the requisite human resources in line with their strategic objectives and service delivery programmes)
• Extending the Competency Assessment Framework to levels lower than the Senior Management Service (to create a better basis for recruitment, selection and staff development at these levels)
• Developing a scares skills framework for the public service
• Implementation of Anti corruption strategy
• Implementation of the Gateway project

All these and the others listed earlier contribute to the idea of enhancing institutional capacity either by

• Supporting the institutions directly, or
• Providing enabling frameworks and platforms through which institutions can function better.

Because institutions matter, it is important to have a network of capable institutions in order to give effect to government’s commitment to creating a better life for all. The initiatives reflected above seek to contribute both to poverty alleviation and the creation of sustainable institutional capacity.