REPORT ON THE GOVERNANCE AND CIVIL SERVICE REFORM PROGRAMME PHASE 2 FOR THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 2004 TO APRIL 2005
1.0 BACKGROUND
Under the Terms of Reference of the Coordinator of Public Service Reform, it is stipulated inter alia that he will report to DFID (West Africa Division and its Senior Governance Adviser) on a six-monthly basis and in writing, covering a forward plan of activities, progress and problems. This report covers the period November 2004 to April 2005.
2.0 WORK PROGRAMME
The work programme for the period May to October 2005 is attached as Annex 1.
2.1 Management and Functional Reviews
As a logical follow-up to the six reviews conducted in the Ministries of Education, Health, Agriculture, Local Government, Defence and Trade, provision is made under GCSRP Phase 2 to build on these pilot reviews by carrying out further reviews in the remaining Ministries. However, it was agreed that the next wave of reviews would be carried out by a qualified consultancy firm jointly selected by DFID and GoSL. Technical and commercial proposals were received from British Council, HTSPE, Bannock Consulting, Public Administration International, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, PA Consulting Group and Adam Smith International. Technical bids were separately evaluated by DFID London and GoSL (represented by the Minister of Presidential and Public Affairs and the Coordinator of Public Service Reform). The joint assessment of technical bids was done through a teleconference using facilities provided at the DFID Office in Freetown. The commercial bids were independently assessed by DFID’s Procurement Division in East Kilbride and matched with the technical assessment to arrive at the final scores. With the consolidated scores, Public Administration International (PAI) emerged as the preferred bidder to undertake the assignment. PAI’s proposal was presented in collaboration with CoEn Consulting and the consortium includes a number of Sierra Leoneans and regional consultants. Following joint consultations with PAI on issues such as the number of consultancy input days and the appropriateness of some
personnel, the contract was issued by DFID in early February 2005. An inaugural mission was undertaken thereafter by a team which included PAI’s Ms Claire Cameron, the Team Leader for the Project Mr Stephen Catchpole and Ms Victoria Cooper of CoEn Consulting. Extensive discussions were held with the Governance Reform Secretariat and other key stakeholders during the inception phase of the project. The inception report which includes the project implementation plan was presented in April 2005. A provisional timetable for the programme of reviews covering the period May 2005 to May 2006 is annexed to the inception report and it takes cognisance of the requirements agreed with the Steering Committee.
The inception report contains recommendations on the following:
· Strengthening the implementation process during the fieldwork stages of individual reviews, and following consideration by the Steering Committee on Good Governance and approval of recommendations by Cabinet;
· The formation of Change Management Teams in Ministries which should be involved in fieldwork, implementation and monitoring of the reform process;
· Proposed methodology covering initial visit, issuing of questionnaire, structured interviews, data collection and analysis, written report and implementation.
A new feature is the proposed recruitment of a limited number of local graduates for “junior” project consultancy positions to provide support and additional capacity in the review process. These graduates will work with the international, regional and local Sierra Leonean consultants on the management and functional reviews. The merit in this approach is that they will benefit from training and transfer of skills which would be utilised later to continue management and functional reviews under the Management Services Division (MSD) of the new Human Resources Management Office (HRMO).
2.1.1 Ministry of Local Government and Community Development
As mentioned in the last report, a second review of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Development was conducted during September and October 2004. The Ministry was revisited to assess the changes required to cope with the devolution of major functions to elected councils. The report was released in November 2004 and circulated to members of the Steering Committee on Good Governance and other important stakeholders. A meeting of the Steering Committee was convened on 21st January 2005 to discuss the review report as an agenda item. A number of contentious issues arose touching on the Ministry’s structure and working arrangements. One such issue was the recommendation contained in the report that the Directorate of Community Development should be discontinued and the residual headquarter functions merged into the proposed new Directorate of Planning. The rationale behind the recommendation is that the Local Government Act transfers the local operations of the Directorate of Community Development to the Local Councils. In consequence thereof, the Directorate will no longer be implementing community development activities and will therefore not justify the status of a Directorate in its own right. The Ministry finds this recommendation unacceptable as it feels among other things that the Directorate has a vital role to play in the coordination of community development programmes implemented by the Local Councils. The discussions were deferred pending a re-examination (by the Ministry) of the recommendations contained in the report. At a subsequent meeting of the committee held on 3rd March 2005, the unavoidable absence of the Minister and Permanent Secretary rendered it difficult to deliberate on the matter. Discussions were again deferred to a date that would be mutually convenient for the Ministers of Presidential Affairs and Local Government.
2.1.2 Ministry of Defence
In keeping with the implementation mechanisms approved by Cabinet, the Ministry was requested in December 2004 and reminded in February 2005 to submit a working paper containing a revised statement of objectives for each organisational unit in the new structure, setting out its functions and management structure. The Ministry was also requested to forward an outline programme for the workshop aimed at sensitising the staff about the process of the reform. A response is still awaited.
2.1.3 Ministry of Trade and Industry
As in the case of the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Trade and Industry was also requested in December 2004 to submit the same information. In January 2005, the Unit was informed that they were “still in the process of compiling a Working Paper” and that it “would be forwarded soonest upon completion”. The information has still not been forwarded.
2.1.4 Revisiting Pilot Reviews
As part of the Inception Phase, Messrs Stephen Catchpole and Peter Edmond visited five of the six Ministries already reviewed to examine the status of implementation. The Ministries of Education, Health, Agriculture, and Trade and Industry have been scheduled for revisiting as follows:
Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology - May to July 2005
Ministry of Health and Sanitation - January to April 2006
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Food Security - May to July 2005
Ministry of Trade and Industry - 2007
The focus will be on implementation issues and the development of Ministries in order to support the country’s poverty reduction strategy paper. Revisiting the pilot Ministries also offers a unique opportunity for the junior consultants and civil servants to receive relevant training and capacity building.
2.1.5 Issues and Problems
In October 2004, Cabinet had observed among other things that most of the reform agenda was limited to diagnostic studies and that no effort had been made beyond that to address problems identified in the Ministries/Departments where functional reviews had been conducted. Cabinet had also directed that the Minister for Presidential Affairs should liaise with the Coordinator of Public Service Reform to obtain his views and reactions on the matter. In March 2005, Cabinet considered a memorandum submitted by the Minister for Presidential Affairs to which was attached status reports reflecting progress of implementation. Cabinet noted that the management and functional reviews were progressing and that each Ministry was responsible and accountable to the Steering Committee on Good Governance for the implementation of the reform measures approved by Cabinet. It also noted that implementation of reform measures in the Ministries of Trade and Industry, and Education Science and Technology was fraught with difficulties, and agreed that the Ministers of the two Ministries should forward their concerns to the Steering Committee on Good Governance.
The problems earlier identified by the Unit in the implementation process were recognised by the PAI consortium during the inception phase and recommendations have been made in the inception report to tackle them (see paragraph 2.1 above). It is anticipated that the new procedures and implementation mechanisms would go a long way to strengthen the implementation process and achieve better results. It is noteworthy that Cabinet has recognised the need for Ministers to bring their concerns about implementation to the attention of the Steering Committee. This will help to address the issue of an apparent disconnect between the political leadership and the top management cadre in the implementation process, by way of promoting better collaboration and cooperation.
2.2 Conversion of The Establishment Secretary’s Office into a Human Resources Management Office (HRMO)
Technical and commercial bids were submitted by the British Council, Adam Smith International, Public Administration International and PriceWaterhouse Coopers for the consultancy assignment to convert the Establishment Secretary’s Office (ESO) into a Human Resources Management Office (HRMO) and the implementation of a Records Management Improvement Programme (RMIP) for the Civil Service. As in the case of the Management and Functional Reviews, technical bids were separately evaluated by DFID London and the GoSL team. Using teleconference facilities the joint assessment was carried out. The evaluation of commercial bids and matching of scores were similarly done and PAI again emerged as the preferred bidder. PAI’s proposal was presented in collaboration with CoEn Consulting and the International Records Management Trust (IRMT). Consequent upon joint negotiations, the contract was issued to PAI by DFID in early February 2005. The inaugural mission earlier referred to also covered the HRMO component. The usual consultations were held during the inception phase and an inception report which includes the project implementation plan was presented in April 2005.
The inception report contains recommendations on developing the following:
· A new cadre of HR professionals;
· A new structure;
· A new Civil Service Law;
· New roles and responsibilities;
· Capacity and capability.
This reform initiative will not only bring about restructuring of the Establishment Secretary’s Office but also introduce modern approaches to human resource management and development, and a Civil Service Law.
2.3 Records Management Improvement Programme
The PAI consortium is also handling the Records Management Improvement Programme which is subsumed under the HRMO. The IRMT which is part of the PAI consortium is responsible for this particular component. IRMT’s Director Anne Thurston, a member of the team that made the inaugural mission to Sierra Leone in early February 2005, together with Kelvin Smith who later joined the team held wide-ranging discussions with the GRS and key stakeholders with a view to developing a strategic action plan for the programme. The inception report which includes the implementation plan was presented in April 2005 and it contains recommendations on the following:-
· Decongesting and restructuring registries in Ministries and developing model registries;
· Producing retention schedules and procedure manuals/good practice guides;
· Drafting a law and the regulatory and organisational framework for a new Department of Public Records;
· Developing an implementation plan for a new Records Centre;
· Strengthening human resource and payroll records;
· Training for a local records management improvement team and for registry staff;
· Project monitoring, planning and management.
Poor records management is a cross-cutting issue and it plagues the entire civil service particularly in the areas of personnel, financial, accounting and policy records. It is anticipated that records management improvements will impact positively on service delivery especially in addressing issues such as policy formulation, planning, financial control, decentralisation and poverty reduction.
2.4 Training Seminars For Senior Civil Servants
The focus has shifted from the week-end training seminars to more intensive programmes in the areas already identified in the Report of the Presidential Commission on the Restructuring of the Senior Civil Service and the Report on Capacity Building Plans for the Institute of Public Administration and Management (IPAM) and the Civil Service Training College (CSTC). It is envisaged that under GCSRP Phase 2, the GRS will collaborate with the Establishment Secretary’s Office and the SES Implementation Unit in the Office of the President to organise such in-service training using local training institutions like IPAM and other training providers who are capable of offering customised management and staff training programmes. Another possibility that can be explored is the use of the UK-based Centre for Management and Policy Studies (CMPS) to conduct the required training locally. The Coordinator met with the Establishment Secretary and the Head of the SES Implementation Unit in February 2005 to discuss this matter and it was agreed that we should start off with a one-week Senior Executive Development Course, catering for multiple groups of thirty participants in each group. It was also agreed that the Coordinator would seek customised proposals for the said course from IPAM and FJP Management Engineering. The proposals have been initially examined by Keith Bastin and the Coordinator and we await the reaction of the Establishment Secretary and the Head of the SES Implementation Unit who were unavoidably absent at the scheduled meeting. It would be advisable to be informed by the findings of the training needs analysis, and the comprehensive training policy that is being developed by Carol Scoines of Crown Agents (see Para 2.5) before we embark on further training. It is absolutely essential that we handle the training programme in a planned and focussed manner so that we derive benefits that enhance service delivery.
2.5 Development of a Training Policy for the Civil Service
At a meeting held on 21st January 2005, the Steering Committee on Good Governance approved the Terms of Reference for the consultancy to develop a comprehensive training policy for the Civil Service. Carol Scoines a Human Resource Development/Training Consultant of Crown Agents, UK was selected from among other consultants to undertake the assignment. The consultant arrived in mid-April and held initial discussions separately with the Coordinator, the Establishment Secretary and the PAI Team Leader. The draft training policy framework developed by a local Task Force together with Prof. Stephen Adei’s study on the design of capacity building plans for (IPAM) and (CSTC) were made available to the Consultants to feed into the development of the training policy. The activities in her work plan include the training needs analysis; assessment of training institutes; review of the training process; review of training and performance relationship; linkage between training and other aspects of human resource management practice; establishing benchmarks for uniformity and quality assurance in training outcomes; examining flexibility and decentralisation of training initiatives within Sierra Leone; and the development of a training policy. It is expected that the report will be available by early June 2005.