The Prime Minister approved the outline of a “Performance Monitoring and Evaluation System (PMES) for Government Departments” in 2009. Under PMES, each department is required to prepare a Results-Framework Document (RFD). An RFD provides a summary of the most important results that a department/ministry expects to achieve during the financial year.
This document has two main purposes:
- (a) move the focus of the department from process-orientation to result-orientation, and
- (b) provide an objective and fair basis to evaluate department’s overall performance at the end of the year.
A Results-Framework Document (RFD) is essentially a record of understanding between a Minister representing the people’s mandate, and the Secretary of a Department responsible for implementing this mandate. This document contains not only the agreed objectives, policies, programs and projects but also success indicators and targets to measure progress in implementing them
The RFD addresses three basic questions:
- (a) What are ministry’s/department’s main objectives for the year?
- (b) What actions are proposed by the department to achieve these objectives?
- (c) How would someone know at the end of the year the degree of progress made in implementing these actions? That is, what are the relevant success indicators and their targets which can be monitored?
The RFD contains the following six sections:
- Section 1 Ministry’s / department’s Vision, Mission, Objectives and Functions.
- Section 2 Inter se priorities among key objectives, success indicators and targets.
- Section 3 Trend values of the success indicators.
- Section 4 Description and definition of success indicators and proposed measurement methodology.
- Section 5 Specific performance requirements from other departments that are critical for delivering agreed results.
- Section 6 Outcome / Impact of activities of department/ministry
Objectives under RFD should be directly related to attainment and support of the relevant national objectives stated in the relevant Five Year Plan, National Flagship Schemes, Outcome Budgetand relevant sector and departmental priorities and strategies. President’s Address, the manifesto, and announcement/agenda as spelt out by the Government from time to time. Objectives should be linked and derived from the Departmental Vision and Mission statements. Objectives of institute should be mandated core objectives and long term in nature. Only relevant and important actions and the success indicators should be included for each objective. A success indicator provides a means to evaluate progress in implementing the policy, programme, scheme or project. Target/criteria values (the Agreed Performance Targets) should be achievable which means realistic. Section 6 contains the broad outcomes and the expected impact the department/ministry has on national welfare. It captures the very purpose for which the department/ministry exists. This section keep reminding us about not only the purpose of the existence of the department/ministry but also the rationale for undertaking the RFD exercise
At the end of the year, every department has to compute its Composite Score for the past year. This Composite Score reflects the degree to which the department was able to achieve the promised results. Performance evaluation is done at the end of every six months also. It is reviewed by the High Power Committee (HPC) on Government Performance.Timeliness of reporting under the RFD is a key for achieving the higher scores. Besides monthly reporting, the reports need to be submitted in stipulated timeframe and with the approval of the competent authority.
Based on the composite score every Ministry/ Department is rated as Excellent (100-96%), Very Good (95- 86%), Good(85-76%), Fair (75-66%), Poor (65% and blow).
For past three years i.e. 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 the composite score and rating of CIRCOT were 88.97 (Very Good), 98.00 (Excellent) and 98.00 (Excellent) respectively. CIRCOT’s overall annualperformance over the years is improving.