An investigation into the Gauteng Department of Health and Social Development's monitoring and evaluation system

• Main Author: Dube, Phillip Clement
• Format: Others
• Language: en
• Published: 2013
• Subjects: Performance standards; Monitoring and Evaluation System; Service delivery; Department of Health and Social Development
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10539/12996

Thesis (M.M. (Public Policy))--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, 2013. === The Auditor General identified some gaps in the quality of performance information that was reported by the Gauteng Department of Health and Social Development (GDHSD) to the public. The information was inaccurate and unreliable (Gauteng Department of Health and Social Development, 2009; 2010; 2011). The National Government passed the Policy Framework on Government-Wide Monitoring and Evaluation System in 2007. Some of the objectives of which were to improve the quality of performance information and service delivery in government. This development required government departments to develop and implement strong and effective M&E systems. The GDHSD formally implemented its M&E system in 2007; one of the objectives of which was to generate good quality performance information. The GDHSD’s M&E system has failed to achieve this objective. The study investigated some aspects of the GDHSD’s M&E system with regard to its poor quality performance information. The study found that some of the problems in the GDHSD’s M&E system, which the study highlighted, were the lack of adequate and appropriate capacity and skills for monitoring and evaluation; the absence of proper structures, processes and systems for monitoring and evaluation; the absence of quality assurance mechanisms for performance data; the selective application of data management rules and regulations; and a low morale amongst some staff members of the GDHSD. One of the notable findings was that there is manipulation of some performance information for political reasons. The study made some recommendations on how to strengthen the GDHSD’s M&E system based on the identified gaps. Some recommendations are that the GDHSD needs to capacitate its M&E directorate; develop proper monitoring, evaluation, reporting and data management processes and systems; address the problem of manipulation of performance information for political reasons; and promote a culture of good work ethics within the staff members of the GDHSD. The implementation of these recommendations may assist to strengthen the GDHSD’s M&E system, thus also helping it to improve the quality of its performance information and service delivery.