Archive

A great deal has been written about the importance of achieving prioritisation in public sector planning, and even more has been written about how this could be done, but most of the latter work focuses on the theory of how this is to be achieved (the assumed characteristics of a successful prioritisation system, the suggested components of a performance management system, etc.). Twende Mbele commissioned a literature review focusing on two areas:

• approaches, processes and tools that could support more effective plan prioritisation and budget alignment; and
• the utilisation of monitoring and evaluation systems and information to support better prioritisation and alignment.

A review of literature – drawn from a wide range of disciplines – suggests that there are a number of factors that are positively correlated with long-term and sustainable improvements in the process of prioritisation as well as monitoring and evaluation in the public sector.

The importance of strengthening national evaluation systems is gaining traction with more states investing in developing the evaluation capacity of their institutions and systems for improved program delivery. Embedded in that approach, is the development of homegrown evaluation tools to conduct country-driven evaluations to improve overall government efficiency and effectiveness. Mainstreaming gender into evaluation policies and processes and involving national gender machineries should be part of the “modus operandi” of national evaluation systems. A national gender machinery monitors government actions to promote gender equality (Testolin, 2001).

CSOs come with varying human and financial capabilities, and serve on issues ranging from basic social services to the protection of human and environmental rights. As such, CSOs represent a wealth of knowledge and potential influence, and have much to offer in the process of national development.

Within a countries evaluation ecosystem, CSOs play a significant role as a source of evidence generation. They employ monitoring and evaluation (M&E) professionals; commission evaluations in different countries, and in many cases, they have the more advanced M&E systems, generating significant amounts of data and evaluation evidence.

A great deal has been written about the importance of achieving prioritisation in public sector planning, and even more has been written about how this could be done, but most of the latter work focuses on the theory of how this is to be achieved (the assumed characteristics of a successful prioritisation system, the suggested components of a performance management system, etc.). There is little systematic work that considers critically what works, what doesn’t work and why, and how these conclusions might be relevant in the South African context.

With respect to the issue of “alignment”, there is less critical research to be found, nor is there universal agreement on exactly what “alignment” means in the complex environment of the public sector. The term is often used without having a clear definition attached to it. However, two useful conceptualisations of the terms suggest that alignment may be used to assess what is happening within one particular organisation as well as how this dynamic is manifested across the public sector.it is helpful to conceive of alignment as a process, something that needs to be actively and continuously managed, rather than a static structure or regulation. The aim of this research is to undertake a literature review focusing on two areas:

• Approaches, processes and tools that could support more effective plan prioritisation and budget alignment; and
• The utilization of monitoring and evaluation systems and information to support better prioritisation and alignment.

Five years into implementing the NES, DPME started an evaluation of the entire system. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess whether implementation of the NES since 2011/12 is having an impact on the programmes and policies evaluated, the departments involved and other key stakeholders; and to determine how the system needs to be strengthened.