ATC140714: Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration as well as Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: Report on Budget Vote 6: Department of Planning,  Monitoring and Evaluation

Public Service and Administration

Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration as well as Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

REPORT ON BUDGET VOTE 6: DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION

 

1. Introduction

The Public Finance Management Act, section 27 clearly stipulates that the Minister must table the annual budget for a financial year in the National Assembly before the start of the financial year. I n terms of section 10 (1) (c) of the Money Bills Amendment Procedures and Related Matters Act, No 9 of 2009, the relevant members of Cabinet must table updated strategic plan and annual performance plan for each department, public entity or institution, which must be referred to the relevant Committee for consideration and report.

In line with its constitutional oversight mandate over the executive, the Portfolio Committee considered briefing from the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) for Budget Vote 6 which includes the following additional programmes which are legally under and deriving from Budget Vote 1 of The Presidency: National Planning Commission and National Youth Development Agency (NYDA).

 

2. Purpose

The purpose of the report is for the Portfolio Committee to consider and approve Budget Vote 6 for 2014/15 financial year for the Department through exercising oversight on their strategic plan and annual performance plan.

 

3. Overview of the strategic plan, budget and associated objectives of each programme for 2014/15 financial year

In terms of the Estimates of National Expenditure (ENE) for 2014, the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation derived its mandate from section 85 of the Constitution. The Department was promulgated in January 2010 in line with Section 85(2) (c) of the Constitution. As from 1 April 2011 the Department was assigned Vote 6 after being removed from Vote 1: The Presidency. The mandate of the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (the Department) is derived from Section 85 (2) (c) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (the Constitution) which states that the President exercises executive authority, together with the other members of the Cabinet, by coordinating the functions of State Departments and administrations.

The Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation is specifically mandated to:

· Facilitate the development of plans or delivery agreements for the cross cutting priorities or outcomes of Government.

· Monitor and evaluate the implementation of service delivery agreements.

· Monitor the performance of individual national and provincial government departments and municipalities.

· Monitor frontline service delivery across the public service.

· Manage the Presidential Hotline.

· Carry out evaluations.

· Promote good monitoring and evaluation practices in government.

· Provide support to delivery institutions to address blockages in delivery.

 

4. Strategic goals of the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation

The strategic oriented goals of the department as set in its strategic plans based on its mandate are as follows:

· An efficient and effective department that complies with legislation, policies and good corporate government principles.

· To advance the strategic agenda of government through the development and implementation of delivery agreements for the outcomes, monitoring and reporting on progress and evaluating impact.

· To promote monitoring and evaluation practice through a coordinated policy platform, quality capacity building and credible data systems.

· To monitor the quality of management practices in departments and the quality of front line service delivery.

 

 

 

4.1 Monitoring and Evaluation of the national priorities

This include the monitoring and reporting on the implementation of plans and/or agreements evaluating government programmes, plans and policies to determine their impact.

4.2 Management Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

These include assessing quality of management practices in individual national and provincial departments Management Assessment Performance Tool (MPAT) and Municipalities through Municipal Assessment Tool (MAT).

4.3 Monitoring Frontline Service Delivery

Frontline service delivery monitoring involves conducting monitoring visits (announced and unannounced) to assess the quality service delivery in the frontline service facilities, using structured questionnaire to guide interviews with citizen and staff, as well as observation by monitors. It also involves the use of the Presidential Hotline to provide citizens a platform to communicate with government about the quality of service they receive. The Department will also rollout its Citizen Based Monitoring framework by extending its pilot sites and producing reports on sites.

4.4 Government-wide M&E System (GWM&ES)

Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation System involves the development of guidelines and building of capacity for M&E across government.

5. Priorities over the medium-term

The priorities for the 2014/15 Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation are informed by the 2011/12-2014/15 strategic plan and the National Development Plan as translated into the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) for 2014-19. The DPME has through its outcomes monitoring and evaluation work, developed a number of monitoring and evaluation tools to fulfil the below functions:

· Facilitation of the development of the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF), delivery agreements, performance agreements between the President and his Ministers

· Assess departmental Strategic Plans and APPs to determine and enhance their alignment with the NDP, MTSF, Delivery Agreements and the budget.

· Focus on monitoring the implementation of delivery agreements to achieve government outcomes a

· Evaluate critical government programmes, policies and plans to determine their impact.

· Monitoring of management practices in national, provincial and municipalities using the assessment tools (MPAT and LGMIM)

· Promote and strengthen participatory democracy through its Citizen Based Monitoring Programme (CBM).

· The Presidential Hotline and the frontline service delivery monitoring programme (FSDM) will continue to be implemented to provide a platform for citizens to provide feedback on the quality of services they receive from government institutions.

 

6. Budget Allocation

The Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation’s overall budget allocated was R192.7 million in 2013/14 financial year and it has increased significantly to R208.2 million in 2014/15 financial year. The budget had increased significantly due to additional mandate added to the Department such as assessment of departments’ strategic plans, municipal assessment tool and institutional monitoring and evaluation. The budget of the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation is divided into three programmes and additional two programmes deriving from Vote 1 which are as follows:

Table 1: Budget per programme

Programme	Allocated	Medium-Term Expenditure Estimate
R million	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2016/17
Administration	58.7	63.8	62.7	66.8
Outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation	71.8	78.2	83.2	88.3
Institutional Performance Monitoring and evaluation	62.2	66.2	73.8	77.6
Total	192.7	208.2	219.7	232.7

Source: National Treasury 2014

 

a. Programme 1: Administration

The main objective of the programme is to provide strategic leadership and management as well as administrative support resource management, financial management and information technology services to support departmental strategic and operational goals. The programme’s objective is to ensure that the Department has effective strategic leadership, administration and management, and to ensure that it complies with all relevant legislative prescripts. The budget allocated for the programme is R63.8 million in 2014/15 which will increase over the medium term period. Over the medium term, the budget allocation for programme 1 will increase as follows: in 2015/16 financial year with R62.7 million and in 2016/17 with R66.8 million to enable the Department to execute its mandate.

b. Programme 2: Outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation

The main purpose of the programme is to advance the strategic priorities by developing and implementing the outcomes system, monitoring and reporting on its progress, and evaluating its impact. The budget allocated for the programme 2 was R71.8 million in 2013/14 and in 2014/15 financial year the allocation is R78.2 million. The Department would increase the budget over the medium term period as follows; in 2015/16 financial year is R83.2 million and in 2016/17 financial year is R88.3 million. The number of personnel in this programme is therefore expected to increase to 82 by 2016/17 financial year.

The Department had planned to review and revise the delivery agreements which the President would be signing with Executive. Every financial year, the Department will produces assessment reports on delivery outcomes. The spending focus over the medium term will be on completing the process of signing the new performance and delivery agreements with the Ministers, which are informed by the medium term strategic framework and the 14 delivery outcomes which are aligned to the NDP.

The programme will accommodate the President’s directive to establish the secretariat services to the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on Revitalising Distressed Mining Communities. Secondly the Department conducts evaluations on government policies and programmes in terms of the national evaluation plan. The Department support the provincial and departmental evaluation plans. Results of the evaluations assist government in making informed evidence-based decision making as well as generating knowledge on the programmes and policies.

C. Programme 3: Institutional Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

The programme’s objective is to implement national and provincial institutional performance assessments in collaboration with other centres of government. The performance monitoring of individual institutions is a key element of the delivery agreement for Outcome 12 (Effective, efficient and developmental public service). The budget allocated for the institutional Performance Monitoring and Evaluation programme in 2013/14 was R62.2 million which has increased to R66.2 million in the 2014/15 financial year.

Over the medium term, the budget for the programme will increase significantly in strengthening and enhancing the monitoring visits to service delivery points. The expanded mandate on the strategic annual performance planning qualifies the increase in the budget. Expenditure on travel and subsistence and computer services is expected to increase by an estimated R11.5 million over the medium term, due to the visits and the cost of maintaining the Presidential Hotline. In the medium term there will be an increase in staff complement from 67 in 2013/14 to 82 by 2016/17 financial year.

Measuring the quality of the management practices in government departments is one of the main priorities of the Department through the development, implementation and maintenance of the Management Performance Assessment Tool (MPAT). The MPAT is an essential system of government to measure good governance, develop a culture of continuous improvement and sharing of best practices amongst various departments.

The Department is conducting the Frontline Service Delivery Monitoring Programme (FSDM) implemented in conjunction with the Offices of the Premier. Approximately most of the budget allocated in the programme goes to the sub-programme: Presidential Frontline Service Delivery Performance Monitoring and Support.

The sub-programme comprises of the three divisions which are the Presidential Hotline, Unannounced Monitoring Visits and Citizen-Based Monitoring. Presidential Hotline provides the grievance mechanism for the public and tracks the responsible departments in tackling them. The President made mention of unannounced visits to service delivery points. The Department is in the process during the financial year 2014/15 to strengthen its efforts to conduct unannounced monitoring visits as another way of ensuring efficient, effective, capable and developmental public service.

The primary aim of the Citizen-Based Monitoring programme is to support government departments to strengthen the citizen voice in monitoring service delivery. A policy framework for strengthening the citizen-based monitoring was approved in 2013/14 financial year, however during the year under review a number of reports will be produced. The spending focus over the medium term will be on stimulating improvements in the performance of government service sites such as schools, clinics, and police stations, through service delivery visits and piloting projects in 50 service delivery facilities. This forms part of government’s citizen based monitoring initiative.

 

7. Additional Programmes

D. Sub-Programme: National Planning Commission

The aim of the programme is to develop the country’s long term vision and strategic plan and contribute towards better outcomes in government through better planning, better long term plans, greater policy coherence and clear articulation of long terms goals and aspirations. The budget allocated for the programme was R36.1 million in 2013/14 which increased to R47.7 million in 2014/15 financial year. Over the medium term, the budget will increase to R45.2 million in 2015/16 and in 2016/17 with R49.7 million. The National Planning Commission comprises of three sub-programmes which are: Ministry; Research and Policy Services; Communication and Public Participation. The budget allocated on sub-programme Research and Policy Services will be used to conduct the review of the national spatial and human settlements planning system and the national income dynamics survey. There was staff complement of 29 on the programme in the year 2013/14 financial year.

E. Sub-Programme: National Youth Development Agency (NYDA)

Its purpose is to facilitate the transfer of funds to the NYDA to allow the agency to initiate, implement, facilitate and monitor youth development interventions aimed at reducing and attracting inward investment, trade and tourism. The Agency’s objective is to champion the development and implementation of the youth development policy in government by monitoring and evaluating youth development programmes in South Africa continually. The budget allocated for the 2014/15 financial year is R408.2 million. The table below shows budget over the medium term.

Table 2: Budget per programme

Programme	Allocated	Medium-Term Expenditure Estimate
R million	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2016/17
National Youth Development Agency	392.7	408.2	422.6	444.9
Total	392.7	408.2	422.6	444.9

Source: National Treasury 2014

 

 

 

Project disbursement by program (excluding salaries and overheads)

 

Programme	Allocation
Economic Participation	R 45 674 032
Education and Skills Development	R 44 124 832
Health and Wellbeing	R 1 996 000
Policy, Research and Development	R 26 774 827
Other programmes	R 13 586 776
TOTAL	R 132 156 467

 

With regard to the annual performance plan, the Agency has five key performance areas/programmes which are as follows: Economic Participation, Education and Skills Development, Health and Wellbeing, Policy and Research and Governance. The budget allocated to the Agency is spread across the key performance areas. The spending focus over the medium term is on the programme: Economic Participation whereby the Agency allocated more funding to the youth enterprises and providing grant funding. The programme further strives to create more job opportunities for the youth across the country. In addition the second large allocation is on Education and Skills Development programme which encourages a number of young people to be enrolled in the NYDA to re-write matric, to support the youth through the scholarship programme, career guidance and job preparedness projects and Youth Build Programme.

 

8. Observations

The Committee observed the following matters in relation to the Budget Vote 6:

· The Committee welcomed the design and institutionalisation of the Municipal Assessment Tool (MAT) as a great tool to assist and enhance the performance of the municipalities. The Department indicated that they are piloting the tool in 25 municipalities. The Committee was interested to know the status quo of the tool. The Committee noted that it would take Department 10 years to cover all the municipalities in terms of the tool.

· The Committee further learned that the Frontline Service Delivery Monitoring has been allocated sufficient budget. Part of the FSDM is to pilot the Citizen-Based Monitoring which was allocated sufficient budget. The Committee was concerned about the time frames of piloting Citizen-Based Monitoring.

· The Committee requested the DPME to unpack the budgetary implications of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Revitalising Distressed Mining Communities.

· The Department had appointed 15 sector experts to engage various government departments on the constitutional mandate bestowed in executing their functions in relations to the delivery outcome agreements.

· The Committee noted that turnaround times to respond to Presidential Hotline queries have improved significantly. However the Department would work towards improving 100% targets.

· The Committee noted that the budget allocation for the Department Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation is insufficient to execute fully its mandate.

· The Committee was concerned about the NYDA regarding their grant income. The Committee wanted to establish whether the Agency also considered the plight of youth in rural areas regarding the grant. The Committee wanted to know whether the loans given out generate any interest in order to maintain revenue for undertaking youth projects.

· The Committee was interested to understand the criteria used by the Agency in awarding the grants to the individuals.

· The Committee was concerned about the accessibility of the NYDA on the ground particularly in deep rural areas such as Nongoma. The NYDA marketing strategy was therefore questioned. The Committee requested the Agency to open offices closer to the townships and even at rural service delivery points. The NYDA indicated that there are building partnerships with Community Development Workers to ensure their accessibility. Again social media is used as platforms to reach the youth.

· The Committee noted that the allocation on the Economic Participation programme has insufficient budget.

· Unemployment amongst the youth is a challenge facing the country. The Committee was concerned about how the Agency is intending to support jobs creation for the youth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. Recommendations

The following recommendations were made by the Portfolio Committee:

a. The Portfolio Committee urged the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation to devote more resources and emphasis on the local government through strengthening the Frontline Service Delivery Monitoring programme and Citizen-Based Monitoring.

b. The Portfolio Committee was pleased about the DPME’s turnaround times in responding to the Presidential Hotline queries. However, the Committee encouraged the DPME to ensure there is 100% turnaround times in responding to the queries on the hotline.

c. The Portfolio Committee further encouraged the NYDA to be more visible and accessible on the ground in particular at the rural areas. Partnership between the Agency and Community Development Workers should be strengthened as a way of reaching and uplifting more young people through the NYDA programmes.

d. The Portfolio Committee recommended that the DPME should monitor departments in ensuring compliance of 30 days payment to service providers.

e. The Portfolio Committee requested the DPME to share the results of the Municipal Assessment Tool.

f. The Portfolio Committee asked the NYDA to ensure that their programmes and projects give leverage to other entities’ and government programmes as they attempt to alleviate the impact of poverty through creating an enabling environment for youth employment opportunities.

g. The Portfolio Committee recommends that the NYDA should improve on their accounting practices so that budget allocation is aligned with programmes.

 

 

10. Conclusion

The Portfolio Committee appreciated and expressed satisfaction on the presentation made by the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation concerning the strategic plan and annual performance plan.

 

 

 

The Portfolio Committee recommends as follows:

10.1 That the Strategic Plan, Annual Performance Plan and Budget of the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation be adopted and approved.

 

Report considered.