Ho D PMDS EVALUATION APPROACH 22 July 2019

Ho. D PMDS EVALUATION APPROACH 22 July 2019

Background Ø Cabinet approved the Performance Management and Development System (PMDS) for Heads of Department (Ho. Ds) in December 2017. Ø The functions of the Managerial Leadership Monitoring and Support (MLMS) Unit is to ensure the implementation of Ho. D PMDS across government. Ho. D PMDS involves four performance management phases – Performance Contracting, Reviews, Assessments and Evaluations Ø DPME also acts as the Secretariat supporting the Presidency during Ho. D evaluations. 2

Ho. D Evaluations Approach Ø For national Heads of Department, the Cluster Grouping approach has been adopted in order for the Ho. D Evaluation process to be conducted by relevant members within a Cluster. Ø For example, the evaluation of DGs falling within the Infrastructure Development Cluster will be grouped together and consist of the relevant panel members. Ø In order to expedite performance evaluations, block meetings per cluster will be arranged. 3

Composition of the National Evaluation Panel 4

The Evaluation Panel The DG who will be evaluated is given the opportunity to address the panel on his/her performance. The EA, if he/she so desires may also address the panel. • Additional members may be invited and could comprise of experts in the different fields e. g. Infrastructure, Social Development and Economic Sectors. • The number of panelists should not exceed five and should be familiar with the work of the department. • When members of the evaluation panel are to be evaluated, they will be replaced by another DG. • The evaluation for national DGs will take place over a number of sessions. 5 • The panelists should avoid canceling the evaluation sessions as this would lead to delays in finalising the evaluation process.

The role of DPME as the Secretariat Analyse and summarise the performance assessment documents for ease of reference for the panelists. All documentation relevant for the evaluation session must reach the panelists five days prior to the evaluation session. Act as secretariat during the evaluation sessions. 6 Ensure that the documentation from the panel sessions reach the relevant EA for final decision.

Template to be completed by DG for the evaluation panel INTRODUCTION • Introduction/profile of the department/context/challenges and successes/COE budget/compliance to Ho. D PMDS process EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE DIMENSION (overall score for this dimension) KEY GOVERNMENT FOCUS AREAS • DGs/Ho. Ds must score both the SCM and Diversity. DPME will source data from DPSA and Treasury to verify. • The other 3 KGFAs will use the same approach like the KRAs • Motivate all scores but provide evidence for scores on level 4 and provide additional motivation for scores on level 2. Must have an overall conclusion for the KRAs 7

ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE Continued …… State the score for this dimension, department must count the number of achieved targets. State what was planned, what was achieved and reasons why they were not achieved. Achieved Planned • E. g. 200 • 100 Percentage • 50% 8 Reasons why planned targets were not achieved • Late of the policy • Delays in signing

Continued …… AUDITOR-GENERAL FINDINGS (provide a score) Ø If the department had a disclaimer in the previous financial year and it changes to a qualified audit during the performance assessment period, this can be a reason to change the category/current finding/department’s history must be provided for the last 3 years Current year Previous year Year before previous e. g. Qualified Disclaimer 9

Continued DEVELOPMENT AREAS WERE THE AMENDMENTS IN THE QA IMPLEMENTED? • Indicate implementation of development/panel can also recommend future developmental areas. 10

Continued …… CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS Reflect on all the areas if there is consistency of performance Are there correlations between individual and institutional performance? Evaluation category 11 Panel members must provide reasons for changes of scores (will only consider factors outside the DG’s control)

Post evaluation The recommendation of the panel will be conveyed in writing by the Chairperson to the EA. Should the EA have any queries regarding the recommendation of the panel this must be directed to the Chairperson. The relevant EA will be required to respond to the panel within 30 days. If no response is received, it will be regarded that the relevant EA concurs with the recommendation of the panel. This will then become the final result and must be communicated by the EA to the DG/Ho. D within seven days. 12

Conclusion Ø The 2018/19 evaluation for DGs will take place between February and March 2020. Ø It would be preferable that all 2018/19 annual assessments be completed and submitted to the DPME by the 31 October 2019. Ø Level 4 evidence, the calculator and template to be completed and submitted with the annual assessment. Ø More detailed information on Ho. D PMDS evaluation can be found in the Guideline. 13