State of the Public Service Report 2011 Public Service Commission briefing

Meeting report

Public Service Commission (PSC) State of the Public Service Report 2011 Presentation
Mr Kobus van der Merwe, Chief Director: Monitoring and Evaluation, Public Service Commission, said that the Fact Sheet was produced as a result of the Commission's following up on the recommendations made by the Portfolio Committee following the release of the State of the Public Service 2010 Report.

An audit conducted by the Department of Public Service and Administration had found that although 84% of departments had an anti-corruption policy in place only 47% had compiled an implementation plan. Departments who had dedicated anti-corruption or integrity management units and thus scored higher than 80% in this regard were the South African Revenue Service (SARS), the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the Departments of Trade and Industry (DTI), Correctional Services (DoCS) and Cooperative Governance (DoCG). 

Of the 7 922 cases received, feedback for 37% had been received while 23% cases had been closed. Although the strategy of referring cases to the departments for investigation was premised on the assumption that they possessed adequate capacity to deal with cases, it had been found that capacity in this regard was lacking. This raised doubts around whether the Minimum Anti-Corruption Capacity (MACC)  strategy was working or whether centralised capacity (possibly in the Offices of the Premier) should instead be created.

There had, over the past few years, been a steady increase in the number of cases involving financial misconduct (from 434 in 2001/02 to 1 135 in 2009/10) with very little of this money (12.8% in 2009/10) being recovered. While these incidences were increasing the systems and procedures in place to deal with them were patchy.

In terms of economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the expenditure performance of national and provincial departments were, when looking at total expenditure, fairly under control. There were, however, fairly big variations on departmental level. Over-expenditure on current expenditure was often made up by under-expenditure on capital expenditure. Under-expenditure on capital assets showed a lack of capacity to adequately cost, plan and manage such projects. In terms of local government, 51 municipalities were outside the norm applied by National Treasury in the case of capital expenditure that the variance between expenditure and budget should be no more than 10%. It had been found that the average performance over the 2009/10 and 2010/11 cycles stood at 59% and that departments spent close to 10% of their budgets but achieved only 59% of their outputs thereby suggesting inefficiency in expenditure. It had also been observed that as departments listed hundreds of outputs in the Annual Performance Plans it was difficult to arrive at an overall judgement of their performance. Additionally, many of these outputs were not final and were not related to services or benefits to citizens.

In relation to Development Indicators, the number of beneficiaries of social grants stood at 14 343 110. Research here suggested that a bigger contribution towards the development of the poor than simply the income-enhancement effect of grants. The National Planning Commission (NPC)’s Development Indicators Report showed that 93.8% of households had access to potable water while the number houses with access to sanitation had increased to 79.9%.  The Quarterly Labour Survey had shown that the unemployment rate was 25.7%. The Commission evaluated the capabilities of the Public Service using its monitoring and evaluation system and found that 10 agriculture departments evaluated in 2010/11 achieved an average of score of 93%. Evaluation of the Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme (CASP) had found that the criterion for success was the delivery of farm infrastructure and not successful farming.

The capacity to learn from evaluation findings and improve programmes was a key element of development orientation. In relation to the Commission’s series of meta-evaluations, it had been found that there were many good evaluations available in the Public Service and that the recommendations that came from these could contribute substantially to the improvement of the relevant programmes.

In order to achieve equity, changes at the societal level as well as the economic structure of the country would have to be effected. Although the way in which the Public Service was arranged could make a significant contribution to this objective, applying the same norms and standards across the Public Service would require innovative approaches and deep-going changes in the culture and capabilities of the Service across the system.

In relation to public participation, the Commission’s monitoring and evaluation of 51 departments had found that over the 2009/10 and 2010/11 evaluation cycles, 41% of these departments had a policy on public participation in place while 80% had procedures for soliciting inputs from the public in place and 47% had responded to and used these inputs. Although the majority of departments indicated that they used some system of public participation there were two major weaknesses in the way of lack of feedback to citizens and a lack of records from departments that showed that they had considered public inputs. It had also been found that although Ward Committees were up and running they were not making any impact on municipal decision-making and were not effective channels for engaging with the public. Public participation locally was still too much of a public relations exercise as inputs were solicited from the public but with little evidence of how this influenced public policy or service delivery design. As a result alternative approaches needed to be tested in practice.

In terms of accountability, in the 2009/10 financial year there were 16 Heads of Department (HoDs) who qualified to be evaluated. As at the end of October 2011 only two had been evaluated. This was the worst non-compliance rate the Commission had ever reported since the inception of the HoD evaluation framework in the 2001/02 financial year. In the 2009/10 financial year, only 54% of municipalities, 66% of national departments and 72% of provincial departments had obtained unqualified audit opinions.

In terms of transparency, the 51 departments evaluated over the 2009/10 and 2010/11 cycles 81% reported on performance while 62% had procedures for access to information in place. The Open Budget Index 2010 noted that South Africa scored the highest (92) of the 94 countries surveyed. The Commission had reservations around whether the Annual Reports enabled readers to arrive at a summary judgement on performance. Although there was currently a wealth of information available in South Africa, it was not as user-friendly as it could be – from the perspectives of both the access to information and the interpretation thereof.

Fifty-one percent of departments were found to have good Human Resources (HR) practices. Though management reporting was done in 75% of these, only 27% saw a response from management. Additionally, although 88% had a skills development plan in place, these plans were based on a needs analysis in only 53%. In addition, while 62% had two thirds of these plans implemented, only 13% saw two thirds of their training impact assessed. Although recruitment policies were in place, there was poor compliance in relation to recruitment times with 51 departments having taken an average of 163 calendar days to fill a post from the date such posts were advertised. It took department an average of 189 days just to advertise the post. Although there was high compliance with management reporting on recruitment, it had been found that management took no action on these reports. Although there were workplace skills plans in place, there was poor implementation of these plans. Very few departments did any assessment of the impact of training provided. The overall picture showed that although compliance levels were increasing the quality of compliance was still of a poor standard. The development of HR policy and reporting on its compliance appeared to not have resulted in a properly recruited, managed and well-motivated Public Service.

In terms of representivity, as at 21 September 2011, employees at Senior management Service (SMS) level were made up of 72% Africans, 5% Asians, 10% Coloureds and 13% Whites. Of these 37% were female and 63% male. Only 4 797 (0.3% were people with disabilities).

Discussion
The Chairperson said that the Committee was pleased with the comprehensive presentation delivered and that significant inroads represented by this presentation would allow it to better liaise with the Public Service in order to ensure better effectiveness there.

Mr A Williams (ANC) agreed and said that the presentation made it clear that although there were skills development plans in place, the impact of this training appeared to be minimal. The Report made it clear that departments were complying with the administrative requirements and not the actual purpose of these plans.

Mr E Nyekemba (ANC) asked whether, in future, figures noting its youth representivity could also be included. It was particularly important to absorb the youth into the Public Service given the high rate of youth unemployment locally.

Mr Ben Mthembu, Chairperson, Public Service Commission, answered that this was a very important issue given the high rate of youth unemployment and these figures would be included in its next report.

Ms H van Schalkwyk (DA) said that it was disappointing to see that anti-corruption programmes were in place but not implemented. The Public Service could be professionalised through the appointment of qualified and motivated officials. This would reduce the number of challenges faced.

Mr M Manana (ANC) asked what actions were taken against those found to be non-compliant. As non-compliance was a serious issue, the Committee would need to engage on this matter.

The Chairperson agreed for the need to engage around this matter.

Ms M Mohale (ANC) asked whether a list of those departments which had good models in place could be drawn up so that lessons could be learned in this regard. How assessable were the Annual Reports of departments to the ordinary person on the street?

Mr Mthembu agreed that this was a good idea as it lessons could be learned from such departments.

Ms Phelele Tengeni, Deputy Chairperson and Commissioner, Public Service Commission, added that there was a Batho Pele requirement that Annual Reports be prepared in a manner that made them user-friendly. Although the Commission was currently in the process of putting together a report on how departments were fairing in this regard, information gleaned thus far had indicated that performance here was lacklustre.

The Chairperson asked what its comments were around the National Panning Commission’s report and whether it was working together with this Commission at all. The commissioning of projects to consultants was overwhelming within Government and therefore needed to be looked into. Public participation was not anchoring properly and needed to be prioritised. The poor representation of people with disabilities was of particular concern and needed to be made a priority item.

Mr Mthembu replied that some of its work had been cited in the report by the NPC. It was also planning on working more closely with this Commission. The issue of consultants was a major concern, particularly if a developmental state was to be achieved. The Commission would look at conducting comprehensive research into this matter.

Ms Phumelele Nzimande, Commissioner, added that the Commission was aware of this trend and was currently looking into the ‘agency-fication’ of the Public Service.

The Chairperson said that there were reports before Parliament which could assist the Commission in its work in analysing trends as well as strengths and weaknesses.  

Management of Precautionary Suspension in the Public Service Presentation
In her presentation, Ms Mmathari Mashao, Chief Director: Branch Leadership and Management Strategies, Public Service Commission, said that the objectives of the study were to ascertain from the samples whether the circumstances and conditions under which employees were placed under suspension were compliant with the implementation of the prescribed 60-day period, the cost implications to the State as an employer when placing people under precautionary suspension, whether departments considered the transfer of employees as an alternative, whether departments had internal policies that sought to sensitise employees and key role-players on the procedures related to disciplinary procedures, and what role labour relations components played in the management of precautionary suspensions.

The methodology followed by the Commission included desktop research, literature review and interviews conducted with line managers, labour relations practitioners and selected managers in the national Departments of Home Affairs and Public Works as well the Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape provincial Departments of Transport, Public Works and Education.

In relation to the key findings it had been found that the reasons for departments placing people under precautionary suspension included financial misconduct, insubordination, failure to bank State money, theft and/or fraud, the misuse of State property, drunken driving, corruption, sexual harassment and/or assault, unauthorised expenditure, gross negligence resulting in the loss of State money and the violation of tender processes.   

It had also been found that there was non-compliance with the prescribed 60-day period to institute disciplinary hearings. On average, the sampled departments took longer than three months to conclude investigations. The KwaZulu-Natal Department of Transport, for example, took more than 10 months before it instituted disciplinary hearings.

Reasons provided for the extension of these suspensions included the unavailability of representatives for the employees charged, the unavailability of witnesses and/or interpreters, the employee being booked off sick, a criminal case being opened and running concurrently with the disciplinary procedure and the recusal of the presiding officer. Reviews of precautionary suspensions were done on average between weekly and every three months.

Only three of the sampled departments indicated that they preferred the transfer of employees as an alternative to such suspensions. Departments were overall not effectively using the option of transferring employees. Such transfers could potentially save the employer significant amounts of money (for the periods under review, the sampled departments had collectively paid employees under such suspension a total of R21 004 160).

During the 2009/10 and 2010/11 financial years, the sampled departments saw 293 employees being placed under precautionary suspension. At levels 1 to 8, 228 employees were placed under such suspension while the figures those at level 9 to 12 and SMS level stood at 46 and 19 respectively.

It had also been found that not all supervisors and labour relations officers were knowledgeable about disciplinary matters. In this regard, one of the Commission’s major concerns was the fact that some supervisors in provincial departments did not know the meaning of precautionary suspensions.   

In terms of the outcomes of cases, there were 153 cases pending, 52 dismissals, 18 found not guilty, 11 appeals against sentences, 4 demotions, 3 charges not laid and 3 cases withdrawn.

Of the 10 departments sampled, one had produced an internal policy relating to such suspensions and three had indicated that they had policies in place though did not provide copies of such. The remaining ones had no such policy in place but stated that they relied on the Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council (PSCBC)’s Resolution 1 of 2003. This Resolution, however, did not elaborate effectively on the procedure to be followed when such suspensions were under consideration.

Challenges faced by departments included the poor monitoring of these suspensions resulting in officials not rendering any service to the departments for extensive periods of time pending the finalisation of cases. As a result other employees were burdened with having to take on the responsibilities and functions of those placed under suspension. Additionally, there was inadequate training of key role-players in disciplinary procedure which led to these suspension periods being lengthy as well as poor compliance with time-frames by investigators and presiding officers. A contributing factor here was the high inadequate competency levels of presiding officers, employee representatives and employer representatives / investigators which, in turn, led to delays and extensions.

In order to address these issues, the Commission recommended that departments develop their own internal policies through the Department, that employees be obliged to attend training sessions on disciplinary procedure, that each department develop a database that sought to profile the systematic issues that contributed towards the extension of precautionary suspensions, that cases of such suspensions be recorded in detail with reviews being conducted often, preferably on a weekly basis. Additionally, due to the high cost implications, departments should immediately prioritise the finalisation of such cases. Labour relations units should also play an active role in keeping track of all cases of misconduct and ensure a consistent manner of reporting on the management of precautionary suspensions. In addition, departments should put together databases of capable presiding officers and investigators and also be required to explain what measures they took against managers who delayed the conclusion of disciplinary procedures. Departments should also seriously consider transfers as an alternative before placing employees on precautionary suspension. 

Discussion
Mr Nyekemba asked for a list of those departments that had no disciplinary procedures in place to be drawn up.

Ms Mashao replied that the report did include a list of these departments.

Ms van Schalkwyk said that it was understandable why departments did not prefer transferring employees as these employees could commit the same offence again.

Ms Mashao responded that transfers were done to other components so as to reduce this risk. Additionally, the question of transfers was asked independently of the matter of offence.

The Chairperson said that the Department should always be in attendance when the Committee engaged with the Commission as its continued absence created a disjuncture in the dialogue. This was of major concern to the Committee.

The meeting was adjourned.