TBS Performance and Results Agenda and its Implications for Evaluation

1
TBS Performance and Results Agenda and its
Implications for Evaluation

• Terry Hunt
• A/Senior Director
• Centre for Excellence for Evaluation
• Treasury Board Secretariat

2
Presentation

• Overview
• TBS Performance and Results Agenda
• Management Accountability Framework
• Renewed PRAS Policy
• Expenditure Management Information System (EMIS)
• Expenditure and Management Reviews (EMRs)
• Improved Reporting to Parliament
• Strengthened Evaluation
• Implications for Evaluation Function

3
Overview of TBSs Results and Performance Agenda

• Management frameworks that match how departments
  manage
• Results that departments commit to achieve,
  linked to strategic outcomes
• Improving information on resources and results in
  support of departmental and horizontal
  decision-making
• Strengthening accountability and reporting to
  Parliament through increased transparency on the
  activities and management of government
• A systematic approach to oversight on Expenditure
  and Program Management
• Focus on consequences of internal reallocation to
  deal with pressures
• Identifying opportunities for investment and
  transformation

4
TBS Management Accountability Framework (MAF)
5
MAF

• Objectives
• Define and clarify expectations of sound
  management
• Rationalize existing TBS frameworks
• Develop performance indicators for assessing
  individual (DM) and corporate management
  performance
• Considerations
• Align management expectations to the vision of
  Results for Canadians
• Represent management as a broader integrative
  function
• Elements

6
Management Accountability Framework
Public Service Values
Citizen Focused Service
Citizen Focused Service
Policy Programs
Policy Programs
Governance Strategic Direction
People
Results Performance
People
Risk Management
Risk Management
Stewardship
Accountability
Stewardship
Accountability
Learning, Innovation and Change Management
7
Implementation of MAF

• Although early days, it will be used as
• A basis of dialogue between TBS and departments
  (DM bilaterals)
• An assessment tool of organizational health.
• Input to assessing deputy minister performance
  and,
• Framing future reporting on management

8
Replacing the Planning Reporting and
Accountability Structure (PRAS)
9
The new policy will provide the links between
information sources

• The new policy has three components
• Strategic Outcomes that reflect why the
  organization exists
• Program Activity Architecture (PAA) which
  describe the hierarchy of programs and their
  links to strategic outcomes
• Results and supporting management component
  which detail the alignment of results measures
  and management to governance processes in the
  department
• better link programs, results and management
• be formalized through MOUs between Departments
  and the Secretary of the Treasury Board

10
Enhanced Expenditure Management Information
System (EMIS)
11
The Secretariat is changing the way it acquires,
manages, and analyzes information

• The current system
• Supports Budget Planning and the Estimates
  Submissions process
• Focuses on decision support for Central Agencies
• Integrates information at the Business Line level
  little detail below that level
• Has a primary focus on financial information and
  limited linkage with results

• The new system will provide
• A government-wide approach to integrated
  expenditure management information
• Relevant information at a lower level of
  aggregation
• Aligned information on priorities, plans, actual
  expenditures and results
• Integrated financial non- financial information

12
Expenditure Management Reviews (EMR)
13
The Expenditure Management Reviews are
generating the information that will provide

• A comprehensive understanding of planned and
  actual government spending
• An understanding of the level of program results
  and services that can be delivered with existing
  resources
• Opportunities for reallocations from lower to
  higher priorities
• Opportunities to transform management processes
  and systems
• Intent is to accelerate the review cycle from
  five years to three

14
Improved Reporting to Parliament

15
Improved Reporting to Parliament

• Must be simpler, useful, balanced and credible,
• Balancing results and management information
• Whole of government reporting
• Exploring potential of electronic reporting

16
Strengthening the Evaluation Function
17
Priorities for final year of four year strategy

• Monitor implementation
• Small Agency agenda
• Tools
• Sustainable learning strategy
• Support TB decision-making (RMAF and evaluation
  review)
• Networking advisory services
• Business case for continued TBS support
• Communications

18
Products and Activities

• Report on Quality of Evaluations
• Report on Evaluations Contribution to
  Accountability
• Small Agency Guide on Evaluation
• Internal TBS Guides to Standardize Review of
  RMAFs and Evaluations
• Monthly Armchairs on evaluation Issues starting
  in January, 2003
• Research Agenda on Innovative Evaluation
  Practices
• Regular newsletter

19
IMPLICATIONS FOR FEDERAL EVALUATION FUNCTION
20
Governance and Strategic Direction

• Support the development of Management Frameworks
  PRAS Renewal
• indicators and measures
• aligning activities to strategic outcomes
• Assess Strategic Outcomes and results measures

21
Public Service Values

• Discuss values and ethics
• Protect independence of evaluations
• balance between accommodating management
  information needs versus being too
  accommodating
• Maintain deputy head as main client
• Objective, non-biased information

22
Learning, Innovation Change Management

• New methodologies (eg new technologies, faster
  methods)
• An array of evaluative services
• Identify transformations
• Promote results-based culture -- emphasis on
  ongoing performance measurement
• Promote new ways of interacting with program
  representatives, stakeholders and beneficiaries

23
Policy and Programs

• Internal departmental evaluation policies
  up-to-date
• Role of Evaluation Committees defined
• Focused, meaningful recommendations
• Integral to policy capacity (eg source of
  policy, not just program adjustments)

24
People

• Internal skills and corporate memory
• Learning by doing in-house activities versus
  strategic use of consultants
• Corporate Learning Strategy to address
• different learning needs within evaluation
  community (junior, middle, and senior)
• learning needs of key target groups in support of
  evaluation function (eg program managers, senior
  executives)

25
Citizen Focused Service

• Identify client information needs (Deputy, senior
  executives, program managers, regional offices,
  stakeholders)
• Departmental Evaluation Plan
• Evaluation Issues
• Citizen-centred data as part of performance
  measurement strategy

26
Risk Management

• Risk-based departmental evaluation plans
• Systematically measure risk (eg risk-self
  assessments)
• Risk framework addressing
• Strategic Outcomes - Financial
• Health and Safety - Corporate Priorities
• Government Commitments
• Foundation for establishing priorities
• 1 3 year planning cycle linked to risks, yet
  comprehensive over time

27
Stewardship

• Need to re-assert core evaluation questions
• Relevance
• Cost-effectiveness
• Inform deputy heads on reallocation issues
• Examine management capacity issues and address
  MAF indicators and measures
• Address effectiveness of performance management
  and control regimes
• Equip programs to be in a position to demonstrate
  effectiveness

28
Accountability

• Evaluation directorates need to be accountable
  for the quality of evaluations being undertaken
  in their departments
• This means
• Guidance, monitoring and sign-off by Evaluation
  Directorate on program led RMAFs
• Guidance, monitoring, and sign-off from
  Departmental Evaluation Committee on program led
  evaluations

29
Results and Performance

• Management Action Plan for every evaluation
• Track and regularly report to Deputy on status of
  implementation of recommendations