Evaluation in the Australian Public Service: Formerly practised – Not yet embedded

This article examines what impeded programme evaluation from being embedded in the Australian Public Service (APS), being relevant to the Australian Government’s current priority of embedding evaluation in the APS. It draws on a case study of evaluation as the major element of the 1980s APS ‘Managing for Results’ (MfR) reform and the reasons for evaluation’s later demise. During MfR, evaluation was intended to demonstrate the effectiveness of APS programmes. Although evaluation was incorporated into APS practice by 1992, after 1997, evaluation was no longer required. Currently, agencies must demonstrate their annual non-financial performance over 4 years under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, with evaluation being recommended to support this requirement. It is pertinent to current Government consideration of a National Indigenous Evaluation Strategy, which supports the creation of an independent Evaluator-General to embed APS evaluation practice.

Evaluation in the Provinces and Territories: A Cross-Canada Snapshot and Call to Action

Evidence-based decision-making and managing for results are terms often heard from politicians and senior government officials at both federal and provincial levels of government in Canada. But, while there is some level of understanding at the federal level in terms of the role and use of evaluation in measuring results, there is significantly less information readily available about the extent that evaluation is being used at other levels of government. This paper provides a cross-Canada synopsis on the capacity and use of systematic evaluation at the provincial and territorial levels of government. Authors from each of the ten provinces and two of the three territories provide a succinct analysis of the extent that evaluation is being used in their provincial government, as well as a description of the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for evaluation. There is a paucity of published information on this subject, but the paper uses research conducted in 2001 as a benchmark to compare the state of affairs for evaluation within provincial/territorial governments. With limited progress over the past two decades, the paper offers an overview of findings and some proposed actions for the way ahead.

Testing the Effectiveness of “Managing for Results”: Evidence from an Education Policy Innovation in New York City

“Managing for results” (MFR) is a performance management system that decentralizes authority to managers in exchange for greater accountability in performance. Although MFR makes much theoretical sense, the evidence of the effectiveness of MFR has not been as conclusive. In this study, we use panel data methods to examine the impact of a particular MFR reform in New York City, the Empowerment Zone (EZ), which focused on providing city public school principals greater autonomy to improve school outcomes. In addition, we use objective measures of both performance management and organizational performance. Our differences-in-differences estimates suggest that the EZ had a significant and positive effect on school performance as measured by proficiency rates in standardized mathematics exams, overall performance, and Regents diploma graduation rates, though the effects were not immediately apparent.

Indicators and managing for results: filling the gap in Coach transport services

Este artigo discute a Gestão por Resultados (MFR, no inglês) em contratos de serviços de transporte de passageiros. Apresenta o Processo Integrado de Planejamento e como é possível unir, num único quadro, planejamento, monitoramento e avaliação. Após isso, são propostos um conjunto de indicadores de desempenho capazes de cobrir tanto os requisitos de gestão processual quanto finalística. Ao fim, comenta-se sobre os principais limitadores da proposta bem como fatores críticos de sucesso para a Gestão por Resultados voltada para os contratos de serviço de transporte de passageiros.