Report of the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration on the Public Service Commission’s Fourth Consolidated Monitoring and Evaluation Report of 2007, adopted by the Committee on 19 November 2008:

1. Introduction

The Public Service Commission (PSC) was established in terms of The Public Service Commission Act (No.46 of 1996) and Chapter 10 of the Constitution (No. 108 of 1996). Its powers and functions are set out is section 196 (4) of the Constitution. It states: “the powers and functions of the Commission are –

(a) to promote the values and principles set out in section 195, throughout the public service;

(b) to investigate, monitor and evaluate the organisation and administration, and the personnel practices of the public service;

(c) to propose measures to ensure effective and efficient performance within the public service;

(d) to give directions aimed at ensuring that personnel procedures relating to recruitment, transfers, promotions and dismissals comply with the values and principles set out in section 195 (1);

(e) to report in respect of its activities and the performance of its functions, including any finding it may make and directions and advice it may give, and to provide an evaluation of the extent to which the values and principles set out in section 195 are complied with”

The Fourth Consolidated Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Report is a product of the legislated functions and powers of the PSC. It reports on the implementation of the nine constitutional values and principles governing public administration listed in Section 195(1) of the Constitution.

2. Overview of the Fourth Consolidated Public Service Monitoring and Evaluation Report

The focus of the “Fourth Consolidated M&E Report” was service delivery. This focus influenced the selection of the Departments to be evaluated. Most departments responsible for service delivery are provincial departments. The sample of sixteen departments that the PSC evaluated included the following:

National Departments:

1. Department of Public Enterprises
2. Department of Labour
3. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry
4. Department of Safety and Security

Provincial Departments:

5. Western Cape: Department of Local Government and Housing
6. Gauteng: Department of Community Safety
7. Limpopo: Department of Agriculture
8. Gauteng: Department of Sports and Recreation
9. North West: Department of Economic Development and Tourism
10. Eastern Cape: Department of Public Works
11. Kwa-Zulu Natal: Department of Education
12. Eastern Cape: Department of Local Government and Traditional Affairs
13. Northern Cape: Department of Sport, Arts and Culture
14. Eastern Cape: Department of Social Development
15. Mpumulanga: Department of Safety and Security
16. Free State: Department of Local Government and Housing

The methodology used was to score the departments between zero and five on the achievement of performance indicators as identified by the PSC. Five was the highest score, and meant that the departments were implementing legislation and governmental policies in line with the nine basic values and principles outlined in Section 195(1) of the Constitution. Zero was the lowest score and meant that departments were not meeting the requirements of legislation and policies governing the public service.

Overall, the National Department of Public Enterprises scored the highest (4.33 out of 5) for the 2006/07 research cycle. Thirteen of the sixteen departments scored less than three overall. This meant that thirteen of the sixteen departments sampled were not implementing policies that govern the administration in the public service.

Some of the challenges raised in the report were:

1) Departments experienced challenged in implementing poverty reduction projects, due to lack of guidelines. Difficulties were experienced in engaging with communities to achieve greater beneficiary participation and the alignment of projects with local development initiatives.

2) Departments, whilst having shown an improvement in the preparation of their annual reports, continued to face difficulties when it came to meeting all of the guidelines for annual reports. This was most evident with regard to ensuring public access to such reports.

3) Departments continued to miss Employment Equity targets, and failed to properly consider diversity management issues.

The report also provided an overview of performance over time. The overall scores fluctuated but were relatively low. However, an improvement in scores was reported as ‘promising’, and was influenced by the improvements in reporting standards. The change observed could be attributed to the implementation of reporting requirements of the Auditor-General, the International Financial Reporting Standards and the Public Audit Act (No. 25 of 2004).

3. PSC Findings

The Department of Public Enterprises was noted as the top performing department. There were a few departments that performed well on specific constitutional principles. The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry was highlighted as a department that scored 100 per cent for the “Public Participation in Policy-Making” constitutional basic value.

The Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Public Works was noted for its poor performance in terms of its average time taken to fill a vacancy, from the date that the post has been advertised to the date of appointment. The average time taken to fill a vacancy was 949 days. This practice contravenes the eighth constitutional value of “Good human resource management, career development and practices”.

Absenteeism was highlighted as the main reason for misconduct in the departments studied. The implementation of attendance registers could resolve this systemic problem.

Many of the problems identified by the PSC over the years still persisted. Reasons noted by the PSC for the lack of improvement in performance were the management and leadership of departments, and the lack of continuity and the high staff turnover. This was found to be one of the underlying challenges for departments to achieve the necessary stability required for effective policy implementation.

Another important challenge that the PSC noted was the limited use of internal monitoring and evaluation by departments. The PSC asserted that unless management kept abreast of developments within their respective departments, intervention could prove difficult when required.

3.1 PSC Recommendations

The PSC made the following recommendations, amongst others:

• Departments need to ensure that poverty reduction projects are well managed and implemented in accordance with best management development practice. Also, greater efforts must be made to integrate these projects with local processes.

• The Department of Public Service and Administration should assist departments with their policy formulation process, especially with regards to public participation. The PSC has formulated guidelines, which should be used by departments.

• Fraud Prevention Plans aligned with department specific needs, identified during the risk assessment exercises, should be developed, formally adopted and implemented.

• Departments should develop their own department-specific policy on recruitment and selection. The PSC toolkit on recruitment and selection can be utilised as a guide in this regard.

• Departments should put in place a strategy of prioritising skills development activities to ensure that the activities that have been planned are implemented and that the impact of the training on the enhancement of service delivery is assessed.

• Departments must adhere to the requirements of the Employment Equity Act (Act 55 of 1998).

4. Conclusion

The PSC’s findings in the report reflect negatively on the public service’s ability to deliver services, and the embodiment of the nine basic values, as outlined in Section 195(1) of the Constitution. There were a few departments that scored above average and in some instances 100 per cent for specific performance indicators. The PSC made many valuable recommendations in its report. Overall, the Committee was pleased with the report.

5. Recommendations

It is against the above report that the Committee recommends the following:

5.1 Guidelines for public participation in policy-making should be developed by the Department of Public Service and Administration, in conjunction with the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and the Public Service Commission. Progress on this initiative should be communicated to Parliament by March 2009 in writing.

5.2 Departments, as per the PSC report, should put in place a strategy of prioritising skills development activities. The Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA) should be consulted by the relevant departments. Progress of the formulation of the strategy should be reported to Parliament by March 2009 in writing.

5.3 Departments should ensure that planned training is implemented and that the impact of the training on the enhancement of service delivery is monitored. This should be done in conjunction with the Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA). Progress on the implementation of planned training should be communicated to Parliament by March 2009 by the departments identified by the PSC in its M&E Report.

5.4 A review of the Disciplinary Codes and Procedures should be done, with a view of tightening enforcement of disciplinary procedures, specifically related to absenteeism. The Department of Public Service and Administration should report to Parliament by March 2009 on progress made with the review of the disciplinary codes and procedures.

5.5 Dispute resolution time periods, as set out in the Disciplinary Codes and Procedures should be adhered to by the departments mentioned in the PSC report. Unresolved disputes should be resolved as a matter of urgency, and reported to the PSC before March 2009.

5.6 Members of the Executive and Director-Generals of the departments sampled in the PSC’s Fourth Consolidated M&E Report should report to Parliament on progress with implementing recommendations from the above-mentioned report by the end of March 2009.

5.7 The PSC should report in writing to Parliament by the end of March 2009 on progress with departmental implementation of recommendations from the Fourth Consolidated Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2007.

5.8 The PSC should consider as part of its future M & E reports a section dedicated to Departmental implementation of previous PSC M& E report recommendations.

Report for be considered.