march 2009 performance evaluation of public service delivery (social services)– kenyan experience...

11
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter: Paul O. Omondi The Steadman Group

Upload: debra-potter

Post on 28-Dec-2015

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)ndash KENYAN EXPERIENCE

March 2009March 2009

PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION

Presenter

Paul O OmondiThe Steadman Group

This discussion is outlined as follows

1 Background - This provides the case for current evaluation activity in the Kenya public service

2 Notable downsides with the existing public service evaluation technique

3 Explore potential value for Cost Benefit Analysis as an evaluation technique

Discussion OutlineDiscussion Outline

The Government has recognized the need for evidence based decisions on targets relating to service quality

Thus The New Performance Appraisal System (PAS) has become a key element of the governmentrsquos quality service strategy

From 2004 the PAS has expanded from a pilot of 16 commercial enterprises to cover to cover the entire public service

PAS is based on the need for sustainable efficient effective and quality public service delivery

Background InformationBackground Information

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS requires every public institution to outline its Citizen Service Delivery Charter which empowers the public to demand and to expect specific service standards

The PAS assessments are intended to lead to improvements in service quality particularly among those institutions that failed to meet previous performance targets

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS focuses on 3 parameters

1Performance and quality of service

2 Involvement of service consumers

3 Comparative ranking of institutions by performance

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 2: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

This discussion is outlined as follows

1 Background - This provides the case for current evaluation activity in the Kenya public service

2 Notable downsides with the existing public service evaluation technique

3 Explore potential value for Cost Benefit Analysis as an evaluation technique

Discussion OutlineDiscussion Outline

The Government has recognized the need for evidence based decisions on targets relating to service quality

Thus The New Performance Appraisal System (PAS) has become a key element of the governmentrsquos quality service strategy

From 2004 the PAS has expanded from a pilot of 16 commercial enterprises to cover to cover the entire public service

PAS is based on the need for sustainable efficient effective and quality public service delivery

Background InformationBackground Information

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS requires every public institution to outline its Citizen Service Delivery Charter which empowers the public to demand and to expect specific service standards

The PAS assessments are intended to lead to improvements in service quality particularly among those institutions that failed to meet previous performance targets

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS focuses on 3 parameters

1Performance and quality of service

2 Involvement of service consumers

3 Comparative ranking of institutions by performance

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 3: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

The Government has recognized the need for evidence based decisions on targets relating to service quality

Thus The New Performance Appraisal System (PAS) has become a key element of the governmentrsquos quality service strategy

From 2004 the PAS has expanded from a pilot of 16 commercial enterprises to cover to cover the entire public service

PAS is based on the need for sustainable efficient effective and quality public service delivery

Background InformationBackground Information

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS requires every public institution to outline its Citizen Service Delivery Charter which empowers the public to demand and to expect specific service standards

The PAS assessments are intended to lead to improvements in service quality particularly among those institutions that failed to meet previous performance targets

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS focuses on 3 parameters

1Performance and quality of service

2 Involvement of service consumers

3 Comparative ranking of institutions by performance

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 4: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS requires every public institution to outline its Citizen Service Delivery Charter which empowers the public to demand and to expect specific service standards

The PAS assessments are intended to lead to improvements in service quality particularly among those institutions that failed to meet previous performance targets

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS focuses on 3 parameters

1Performance and quality of service

2 Involvement of service consumers

3 Comparative ranking of institutions by performance

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 5: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Background Information (Conthellip)Background Information (Conthellip)

PAS focuses on 3 parameters

1Performance and quality of service

2 Involvement of service consumers

3 Comparative ranking of institutions by performance

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 6: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Measurement ApproachesMeasurement Approaches

The government currently uses customers satisfaction information to guide operational decisions to improve service

The range of measurements used include

bullBenchmarking

bullGap analysis

bullRanking based on composite score

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 7: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Downsides of Current Evaluation TechniqueDownsides of Current Evaluation Technique

The recent PAS ranking demonstrated that the performance appraisal process presented challenges which require review of the process

In a number of some instances there has been a disconnect between comparative rankings and citizensrsquo perceptions of services

Hence evaluation outcomes and rankings have been seen by many as politically contentious

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 8: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Gaps in the Evaluation ProcessGaps in the Evaluation Process

- In defining survey target group it is evident that the ldquocustomerrdquo concept is largely inapplicable in the public service setting

-Evaluation does not take into consideration resource allocation decisions both in terms of amount and efficiency of disbursement

-Evaluative effort does not adequately examine the underlying need for new services

- Poor coordination has meant limited consistency on tracking of key indicators as well as definition of survey target group

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 9: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

The overarching questions are

1048707 Is the national evaluation system as it exists feasible

-Probably a more realistic approach is to focus on key sectors programs and projects

1048707Does the evaluation system have the potential to drive service improvement

- It has potential to drive service improvements if the right techniques are applied

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 10: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Overarching QuestionsOverarching Questions

1048707 Are customer satisfaction surveys appropriate techniques in evaluating the public sector

- This very much depends on the sector However it does not adequately demonstrate the competitiveness in terms of the extent to which public expenditure reflect the likely

cost benefits

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions

Page 11: March 2009 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY (Social Services)– KENYAN EXPERIENCE March 2009 PERSPECTIVES ON IMPACT EVALUATION Presenter:

Discussion QuestionsDiscussion Questions

What would be the advantages and downsides of a cost benefit analysis approach in evaluating public services

-Does it create increased accountability-Does it create ensure better distribution of resources

-Does it allow for more efficient decisions