A working paper towards enhancing performance measurement in monitoring and evaluation

1. An argument in favour of a DashBoard
Theory in Monitoring and Evaluation in
South Africa
By
EA Ndaguba and Professor EOC Ijeoma
School of Government and Public Administration (SGPA)
University of Fort Hare

2. Presented by
EA Ndaguba
School of Government and Public Administration (SGPA)
University of Fort Hare

3. Introduction
That there is a relationship between M&E
measurement and performance improvement
That higher performance equates improved
service provision to communities
Need for activities in the municipalities to be
measured
– To ensure efficiency, effectiveness, transparency
and accountability
Basis for developing the DTME

4. Performance Dashboard
Monitoring

5. Logical Framework

6. Why Dashboard and What
is Dashboard?
• Generalist Idea: A dashboard is a control
panel placed in front of the driver of an
automobile, housing instrumentation and
controls for the operation of the vehicle

7. The Idea for the Proposition
The central idea of the DTME is to give
stakeholders a place where they can get
at-a-glance overview
To propose a model that ensures
sustainability of organizations performance
as well as a tool for exerting M&E
A model that places emphasis on
effectiveness

8. Significance of DTME
 Firstly, it lays emphases on Effectiveness and
Sustainability which no model, framework or theory on
M&E dealt with (not solely concerned: what is been said
is been done but how it is been done).
 It gives immediately ‘detailed’ summary (visually) of
feedback that tends to eliminate technicalities and
complexities.
 In organization, it discovers deficient aspect and
strengthens it.
 Government as a complex system
 Not just Accountability but transparency and citizens
participation
 Useful in exploiting strength and opportunities
 Dispels the weakness and threats of an organization

9. Basis for DTME?
To provide a strong and coherent M&E
model that promotes learning and
performance measurement.
That is simple and user-friendly enough for
all staff and stakeholder
It is for performance management and
measurement geared towards improving
service delivery, performance of an
employee and performance in the
community services

10. Elements of DTME
That is flexible, and ultimately enhance the
development of:
• Efficiency
• Simple sharing
• Effective visualizations
• Accountability
• Transparency
• Multiple data source aggregation
• Easy communication
• Easy setup, customization, and filtering

11. The Proposed DTME Model

12. Ending Remarks
 DTME is an important managerial tool used to track
progress and expedite decision making in an
organization
 A mechanism for developing effective programmes
that enhance accountability
 The study contends that without a proper and
adequate working model for Monitoring and
Evaluation in the South African context. It would be
practically impossible or too mind numbing
otherwise cumbersome to judge;
– If a project or programme is carried out in the
right direction optimally and how future efforts
might be improved

13. The submission
 The graphical interface if displayed regularly
will enhance the principles of Participatory
M&E
 DTME does not speak to what is been said is
been done but how it is been done and if it
complies with the blueprint or the initial idea
of the project/ programme ab initio and
sustainable
Service delivery protest will be reduced
significantly
Service delivery performance would be
improved in municipalities significantly

14. Cont…
Improve the living standard of living
Corruption will be reduced
 Project and programmes will be completed
as when due
 The communities would be a participate in
the project/ programme circle
 Project and programme will be locally
sustainable

15. Reference
• Abrahams, M. 2007. Historical and emerging theoretical foundations for Monitoring and Evaluation in South Africa: Implications for
practice. University of Cape Town.
• Alexander, M. and Walkenbach, J. 2010. Excel Dashboards and Reports: USA: Wiley Brothers
• DeLay, P. Massoud, N. Rugg, D. Stanecki, K. and Carael, M. 2006. Strategic information for HIV programmes. In: The HIV pandemic.
Local and global implications. Beck E, Mays N, Whiteside A, Zuniga J. (Eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press: pp.146-163.
• DeRosso, D. 2012. The Structural Functional Theoretical Approach: [1] 2003. Accessed February 24, 2012.
• DPME, 2013. “The State and Use of M&E in 96 National and Provincial Departments: A survey conducted in partnership with GIZ”,
Pretoria. Department of Performance M&E
• DPME, 2014. Discussion Document: Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: Principles and Approach. The Presidency: Department:
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation
• Erjavec, J. 2005. Automotive Technology. ISBN 1-4018-4831-1.
• Hetherington, V. 2009. Dashboard Demystified: What is a Dashboard?
• Ijeoma, E.O.C. 2014. South Africa’s Reflections and Juxtapositions of Puffery Psychodynamic Evaluation of Public Administration
Shortcomings: Public Protect versus Election Outcome. An Inaugural Address: University of Fort Hare: Bisho Campus
• Masuku, N.W.K. |Ijeoma, EOC 2015. A Global Overview of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) and its Local Government Context of South
Africa. Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review: Volume 3 | Issue 2 | June 2015: ISSN 2310-2195| ISSN Online 2310-
2152: Independent Service Delivery Monitoring Networks (ISDMN)
• McFadden, P. 2005. CEO of ExcelDashboardWidgets "What is Dashboard Reporting". Retrieved: 2012-05-10.
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2002. Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based
Management.
• Pillay, S. 2004. Corruption- the challenge to good governance: aSouth African perspective. The International Journal of Public Sector
Management: INFORM Global

16. Thank you