Assignment: Choose One of the Two

First Annual Meeting of the African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results

11-14 December 2007 Jinja, Uganda

MfDR Case Studies: Country Experiences in Managing for Development Results

Participant: Ms. Leonora B. Joodt Country: Namibia Designation: Chief Development Planner

As prepared by: Leonora B. Joodt [email protected] +264 61 283 4165 (w) +264 61 226501 (f) Institution: National Planning Commission Secretariat Assignment: Option A

Introduction

“The Third National Development Plan (NDP3) is the first systematic attempt to translate the Vision 2030 objectives into concrete policies and actions. It is to be seen as the first medium strategic implementing tool towards systematic Vision achievement.

Successful planning leads to effective policies linked to cost effective and sustainable expenditure Programmes, supported by broad consensus on priorities and discipline in abiding by them. An effective planning should help to make the best use of scare financial, human and physical resources through:

 Prioritisation  Direct expenditure relation to policies  Coordination of Human and Financial resources  Elimination of duplication  Continuous Monitoring and Evaluation  Sustainable natural resources use  Maximization of effectiveness of government, civil and private society participation  Develop in the stakeholders capacity”¹

“In Namibia, the instruments used for results-based planning include the Integrated Results Based Management (IRBM) Approach by the National Planning Commission, which emphasizes the achievement of results at every level; the Strategic Plans and Balanced Score Card promoted by the Office of the Prime Minister, which focuses on improving the performance of institutions and their staff in achieving results; and the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the constituent Programme Budgeting utilized by the Ministry of Finance that emphasizes “value for money” in public expenditure and achievement of results.” ²

2 Why the need for IRBM:  Lessons from NDP¹ indicated that there is a need for stronger coordination of Programme implementation at all levels; including the need for integration of efforts, services and activities.  Offices, Ministries and Agencies focused on their individual Sectoral plans at certain Programmes and activities did not coordinate and duplication of efforts was identified.  Budget allocation did not focus so much on results but rather on the spending of money allocated.

Purpose:

“An Integrated Results-Based Management (IRBM) approach has been adopted for the formulation and implementation of the NDP3. It is intended to help:

 Improve the strategic planning, coordination, and implementation of the NDP3;  Improve the results from the use of scarce resources through the budgetary process;  Improve the human resource capacity and performance for successful service delivery and development management; and  Improve the monitoring, reporting and evaluation system to provide timely, accurate, and reliable performance information to support and improve the programme and policy decision making.”

Who are the key stakeholders that will drive the process?  National Level: Offices, Ministries, Agencies and the Policy Institutions (OPM, MoF NPC)  Regional Level: Regional Councils and Regional Development Coordinating Committees  Local Level : Municipalities, Village Councils and Settlement Offices  Other: Civic Organisations, Development Partners

What takes Place/How we get things done:  New planning Approach would focus on the accountability of individuals and institutions for specific results will also be established in a more systematic and structured manner.

 Cascading: Under the IRBM approach, the formulation (and implementation) of NDP3 is carried out in teams (Thematic Working Groups, Sub-Sector Task Teams) involving the O/M/As, Regional Councils, private sector, civic organisations and international partners. The NDP3 framework utilised the eight (8) major Vision 2030 objectives and the associated sub-visions, as the highest hierarchal desired results to guide the country’s performance towards a “prosperous and industrialised Namibia.” Using the eight Vision 2030 objectives, the National Planning Commission (NPC) identified national priorities as the Key Result Areas.

3 Struggles Responses: • Grasping the new planning approach • Held consultative sessions to share coupled with limited time to consult the experiences on how to deal or approach remote communities in a vast region certain issues, respond to concerns. presents a major challenge to the Regional • Embark on aligning the planning systems Councils. in the Office of the Prime Minister, Ministry of Finance and NPC • Lack of understanding of the NDP3 Guidelines.

• Lack or limited base line information • Requested and encouraged the stakeholders available to TWGs and Sub-Sectors. e.g. to release information which may be of TWG9; Knowledge Based Technology importance in the planning. National-new area of national development planning, we struggled to get up to date data for this result area.

• The sharing of consultants made progress • Requested Local Consultants to be on work slower (inadequate technical stationed in the Regions for considerable experts) time to deal with planning approach. • Lack of staff.

• Meetings clashed. • Meeting Schedule was kept to avoid clashes of meetings • Time constraint (vis a vi the deadline which were set)

• Lack of participation. • Continuously engaged with Consultants of • Slow response from some sub-sectors. TWGs and Regions on progress of • The failure of some RCs to submit input to formulation on NDP3 contributions. TWGs on time before consultative session • On request of certain Regions they were before finalizing write up on all KRAs and visited and advised. obtaining approval of the Regional • Focal persons assigned to TWGs were Council. encouraged to attend the meetings and • Lack of involvement at RDCC consultative participated and provide technical advices- session with all Las. follow up with NDP3 Stock Taking meetings.

4 How I would do it differently:

• Firstly, identify and address the employment barriers to ensure we retain the skilled labour force, and avoid the high rate of staff turn over that is leaving to the private sector. This would ensure that the issue of lack of staff is addressed.

• Commence with consultation at all levels of planning at least a year in advance with assistance from Technical Advisors who has in-depth experience in implementing the IRBM, to ensure that people understand and grasp the concept of the new planning approach and why we should do things differently. Ensure that they understand the rationale for a new planning approach; they will by into the planning approach and thus commit themselves to ensure that they become result orientated. This would ensure that the issue with regard to time constraint and participation is addressed.

• Ensure that the planning structures at all levels are in place and functioning. Participation and timely submission of contribution would be addressed.

• Put a reward system (rewards would be in kind; e.g. certificates, letter of appreciation, medal, etc) in place, to give credit to success and build to capacity that would avoid making the same mistakes repeatedly. The staff turnover would be adversely affected and one would retain the staff and continue to build capacity.

Results Outcomes  Eleven Thematic Working Groups are  Effective coordination system in place. established and operating  Sub-sector task team are functioning as individual planning units within a sub-sector

 Draft Third National Development Plan has  A second draft document is ready for Cabinet been discussed and commented on by all Decision that reflects all stakeholders input. stakeholders.