Operational Programme

Transcription

1 Draft MINISTRY OF ADMINISTRATION AND INTERIOR Operational Programme ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT Bucharest, April

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CURRENT SITUATION ANALYSIS SWOT ANALYSIS STRATEGY Objectives List of Priority Axes Priority axis 1 Strengthen public policy interventions in the central administration Priority axis 2 Capacity development to improve the service performance of local administration Priority axis 3 Technical Assistance Coherence and compliance with Community and national policies Complementarity of the OP ACD with other Operational Programmes and operations financed by EAFRD and EFF FINANCIAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Management Monitoring and Evaluation Financial management and control Information and publicity Single Management Information System PARTNERSHIP...55 ANNEXES

3 List of acronyms AA AFCOS AIR CF CHUPIA CUPAR EAGGF EC ERDF ESF EU FB FIFG GD GEO GSG HR HRM IB ISP IMC MA MACSF MAI MPF NACS NARMPP NDP NF NIA NSRF OECD OP OP ACD PA PAR PC PER PHARE PIA PPU RTC SEA SF SMIS SOP HRD TA UNDP USAID Audit Authority Anti-Fraud Coordination Service Annual Implementation Report Cohesion Fund Central Harmonizing Unit for Public Internal Audit Central Unit for Public Administration Reform European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund European Commission European Regional Development Fund European Social Fund European Union Final Beneficiaries Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance Government Decision Government Emergency Ordinance General Secretariat of the Government Human Resources Human Resources Reform Intermediate Body Institutional strategic plan Inter-ministerial Committees Managing Authority Managing Authority for the Community Support Framework Ministry of Administration and Interior Ministry of Public Finance National Agency of Civil Servants National Authority for Regulating and Monitoring Public Procurement National Development Plan National Fund National Institute of Administration National Strategic Reference Framework Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Operational Programme Operational Programme for Administrative Capacity Development Paying Authority Public Administration Reform Programme Complement Public Expenditure Review Poland and Hungary Aid for Reconstruction of the Economy Public Internal Audit Public Policy Unit Regional Training Centre Strategic Environmental Assessment Structural Funds Single Management Information System Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development Technical Assistance United Nations Development Programme United States Agency for International Development 3

4 INTRODUCTION Role, Objective and Rationale of the Operational Programme Administrative Capacity Development The need to invest in institutional capacity is recognised by the Community Strategic Guidelines for cohesion in those Member States where socio-economic performance and good governance constitute some of the main challenges of the next period 1. These investments are inextricably linked to continued and effective public sector reform leading to enhanced administrative performance. Socio-economic performance A recent study defined public sector performance as the yield or results of activities carried out in relation to the purposes being pursued. Its objective is to strengthen the degree to which governments achieve their purposes 2. Improved performance in socioeconomic development can only be achieved within a clear political, legislative and administrative framework which provides for the maximisation of investments in human and physical capital. This is all the more important when taking into account the demands of the knowledge-based economy, which require the capacity to innovate, to make effective use of existing know-how and of new technologies. In this context, developing the human capital of public administrations is an essential support to the implementation of structural reforms and administrative capability to change. Furthermore, effective institutional structures are an important source of support that aids the development of competitiveness and supports the investment in human capital. The OP ACD is designed to address Romanian needs in these two areas. The on-going nature of the development and implementation of European Union (EU) policies and legislation must also be taken into account. The European Commission (EC) has noted that weakness in administrative capacity jeopardizes socio-economic development and thus, cohesion 3. Insufficient or underdeveloped institutions limit or delay transposition of EU legislation and policies and risk widening the disparities between Member States and regions. Therefore, strengthening human capital and institutional capacity in the public sector is particularly important in the regions lagging behind which need to develop and implement structural reforms to speed-up development and to achieve greater socio-economic cohesion. Good governance The OECD defines governance as the formal and informal arrangements that determine how public decisions are made and how public actions are carried out, from the perspective of maintaining a country s constitutional values in the face of changing problems, actors and environments 4. National, regional and local authorities are one set of actors in governance. Other actors vary depending on the level of government that is under discussion and generally include social partners, civil society including non-governmental 1 Strengthening institutional capacity and efficiency of public administrations and public services in the next programming period ( ) DG Employment and Social Affairs; 2 Modernising Government, the way forward, OECD 2005; 3 Third Cohesion Report; 4 Modernising Government, the way forward, OECD 2005; 4

5 organisations (NGOs), as well as research institutes, finance institutions, media, lobbyists, etc., as appropriate. There are many characteristics of good governance, such as: participation and transparency, consensus orientation and responsiveness, accountability, effectiveness and efficiency, equity and following the rule of law. Good governance means also efficient institutions with highly professional staff, productive relationships between various actors involved in the development processes, positive attitudes towards business and enterprises and an effective institutional and administrative framework to support development. These characteristics are indispensable for underpinning development. Moreover, achieving good governance can constitute an important challenge especially for regions lagging behind in socio-economic development. The OP ACD recognises that interventions to strengthen governance frameworks are fully compatible with institutional reform and the development of human capital in public administration. The Romanian Position The Romanian Public Administration is in its fifteenth year of modernization and its sixth year of public administration reform (PAR). It recognises that reform is not a once-off event but a continuing effort responsive to changes in the policy context. The PAR is undertaken in the context of Romania s transition from a centrally planned towards a market economy and its convergence with EU standards and practices. State institutions have made significant progress in modernizing the legislative and administrative foundations of public sector activity and are preparing to take on the obligations of an EU member state. The rationale for having a separate OP ACD is that: 1. efficiency in public services lead to increased productivity in the economy, e.g. through faster procedures, improved customer services, value for money, etc.; 2. well-functioning institutions and public administrations are a pre-condition for the successful design and implementation of policies to promote socio-economic development and to contribute to growth and employment; 3. effective institutional and administrative capacity is the key to good governance - an essential element of the Lisbon Strategy. In Chapter 11 of the government programme , the Government of Romania proposes a seamless continuation of the accelerated PAR programme that commenced in 2001 and has been endorsed by successive administrations. In recognition of the expected change in status from an Acceding Country to a Member State, the Government is taking the opportunity to refocus the PAR programme on socio-economic development in line with the overall ESF objectives. This is also consistent with the need to begin the convergence of stand-alone reform initiatives and migrate towards a whole-of-government public management policy capability. Accordingly, the proposed output and result indicators of the Strategy of the OP ACD target real improvements in the delivery of public services and the emergence of a more open, efficient and cost effective public service. 5

6 1 CURRENT SITUATION ANALYSIS In 2004, the Romanian Government adopted an updated strategy for the acceleration of the public administration reform, a document favourably received also by the European Commission. Chapter 11 of the new Government programme set out the direction proposed by the current Government for Public Administration Reform. The overall direction is an uninterrupted continuation of the previous programme in seeking to deal with the weaknesses noted in the 2004 Regular Report. The objectives for Public Administration Reform in the current Government programme are: Reform of basic public services and of public utilities of local interest; Consolidation of the process of fiscal and administrative decentralization; Strengthening the institutional capacity of the structures within local and central public administration. The stage of the implementation of the Updated Strategy concerning the acceleration of the public administration reform in Romania was evaluated and reaffirmed according to the Memorandum no. 8092/25 th of April However, progress to date has not been sufficient and the EC has requested an increased emphasis on the strengthening of the administrative capacity for the accession 5. The general need to invest in administrative capacity is recognized by the Community strategic guidelines for cohesion, in which administrative capacity and good governance constitute one of the main priorities for The public opinion barometers have shown that only 30% of the citizens trust the government, and 43% have trust in the town halls 7. The government s activity in different sectors is perceived to be weak; the number of unsatisfied citizens is bigger than the number of satisfied ones, in all cases. Citizens have a better appreciation of services delivered by public administration, especially those that are closer to them but it is recognised that there is a need for raising standards of performance. It is also expected that partnerships, quality customer service, support to community groups and better information for the citizen will flow from the activities supported by the OP ACD. The remainder of this section analyses the current status of Romanian public administration and begins to develop the rationale for the strategy outlined in the OP ACD Strengthening institutional capacity in central and local administration Structural change in central administration Initiatives for PAR and for good governance have been implemented at central government level. The PAR agenda, supported by PHARE and other programmes since the late 1990s, has pursued modernisation through civil service reform, decentralisation/deconcentration of authority to regional and local administrations and the introduction of a modern policy 5 Country Report 2005; 6 Strengthening institutional capacity and efficiency of public administrations and public services in the next programming period ( ) DG Employment and Social Affairs; 7 Research Centre for Public Administration, Organisational Culture in Public Administration, 2005; 6

7 formulation and monitoring initiative. Improvements in governance were shared by civil service reform, improvements in management and control systems such as the modernization of public internal financial control and internal and external audit and initiatives to promote open government and strengthen parliamentary scrutiny mechanisms. While considerable progress has been made to date, it is recognized in progress reports that there has been insufficient convergence of the various initiatives to achieve their full potential. There are several reasons for this, including the insufficient development of networks and co-coordinating structures to support an integrated approach to the efficient implementation of policies, delays in putting the training infrastructure in place and underdevelopment of the public policy formulation process. The Government of Romania accepts that the central technical ability to manage well prepared and implementable public policy supported by the political level and with genuine inputs from civil society, is a core building block in strengthening the capacity for socio-economic development. The Human Resources Management (HRM) reform is seen as an opportunity to build on progress to date and to take the PAR agenda to a new level, consistent with the national economic development goals of the NDP. This would require that the public policy cycle should receive early attention. In the period , there has been a series of changes to the structure of the Government regarding the number, role and attributions of ministries, governmental agencies and other specialized organisms of the central public administration. At present, the Romanian Government comprises 15 ministries. The working apparatus of the Government is formed of the Prime Minister s Chancellery, The General Secretariat of the Government (GSG), departments and other organizational structures with specific attributions established through Government Decision (GD), that operate under the subordination of the Government. In order to elaborate, integrate, correlate and monitor policies, the Government adopted Decision no. 750/2005 on the set up of the permanent inter-ministerial councils. This act regulates the set up of 11 permanent inter-ministerial councils, organisms with a consultative role, without judicial personality. In the field of public administration, the Inter-ministerial council for administration and civil service, decentralisation, local communities has also been set up. The management of public institutions has mainly been a political one, thus neglecting the importance of strategic management and planning as management instruments. Some individual initiatives have been taken to develop plans and strategies, but it is difficult to estimate the results. The administrative culture is characterized by the importance given to the control of inputs and activities and an upward delegation of responsibility and decision making. A top-down strategic approach has not been yet consolidated. Public Policy Formulation The first normative act that regulates the methodology to elaborate normative acts is Law no. 24/2000, subsequently amended and completed. In 2003, through Prime Minister s Decision no. 258/2003, the Public Policy Unit (PPU) has been created, under the subordination of the General Secretariat of the Government (GSG). PPU s main attributions were to strengthen the Government s capacity to formulate, implement and monitor coordinated public policies at central level and to strengthen the administrative and managerial capacity of the Government. In 2005, the Inter-ministerial committee for the coordination of public policies has been set up and GD no. 775/2005 on the approval of the 7

8 Regulations regarding the procedures to elaborate, monitor and evaluate public policies at central level has been adopted and came into force on the 1 st of January At the same time, a reform of the inter-ministerial bodies has been initiated through GD no. 750/2005. According to this normative act, 11 permanent inter-ministerial bodies have been established. Their main topics are: justice and home affairs; European integration and foreign affairs; economy, market, competitiveness and business environment; public administration and civil service; social affairs and health; education, culture, sports; minorities; agriculture and rural development; regional development; infrastructure and tourism; strategic planning. The lack of a modern public policy management in Romania has been a concern of the donor community, including EC, World Bank and bilateral donors. A recent Sigma report highlighted issues to be addressed in the monitoring functions at the central level of administration, the coherence of the policy formulation framework, inter-ministerial consultation, co-ordination and strategic capacities. The professional and technical knowledge and competences in these areas are limited and need to be significantly strengthened to achieve the policy management reform. This is the main focus of policy formulation processes section under priority axis 1. The development of policy formulation and management will increase the convergence of more modernization initiatives through junction with the reform of the budgetary process from the multi-annual perspective, including the management of public expenditures, also through introduction of strategic planning and monitoring within ministries and performance management systems based upon competence and evaluation of staff. Lessons learned from EC support to PAR Government support for PAR has been strong and consistent. This is reflected by the definition of a separate PAR sector under the National Programme and the merger of the Ministries of Interior and Administration in the summer of PAR sector programming documents have identified a number of persisting deficiencies: weak capacity in terms of resources, lack of staff or staff with low results due to lack of promotion and poor selection (absence of criteria); weak strategic capabilities, resulting in incoherence amongst initiatives, absence of appropriate linkages; structural and procedural problems - such as poor coordination, information flows, cumbersome procedures, weak transparency and limited policy execution at central levels and a major policy shift in favour of a decentralized and deconcentrated system of administration. In July 2005, an ECOTEC interim evaluation report indicated in respect of the policy intervention design process, that: more attention is needed to absorptive capacity in the design process; there is insufficient lesson learning (despite the abundance of lessons drawn on through project monitoring and evaluation); lack of decision making and high level political support (especially to put structures and systems into place and to assign responsibilities with appropriate resources). The Government believes that a more structured approach to administrative capacity development will be needed to overcome the organizational weaknesses that have held back 8

9 progress in all three PAR areas. It is proposed that the OP ACD should be the key driver of this new approach Structural change in local administration The Romanian Constitution and Law no. 215/2001 on the local public administration regulate the structure and functioning of the local public administration authorities. Thus, art. 120, 121 and 122 of the Constitution provide that public administration in the administrative-territorial units is set up on the basis of decentralization, local autonomy, and deconcentration of public services. The public administration authorities through whom local autonomy in communes and towns is achieved are the local councils and mayors elected, according to the law. The county council is the public administration authority for the coordination of the city and commune councils in order to deliver public services of county interest. The Romanian local administration structure includes 41 county councils, the General Council of Bucharest, and 6 local councils for each sector, 314 city councils and 2,848 commune councils. The scale of the local administration and the significance of the management tasks are such that the objectives of public administration reform will not be fully realised in the period to Accordingly, a strategic decision has been made to concentrate reform efforts in areas where economic development is a priority. The local and county councils are deliberative authorities, and the mayors are executive authorities. In the Romania Country Report 2005, the EC has pointed at significant deficiency in administrative capacity at local level, which, if not eliminated, could represent a serious threat to the successful achievement of fiscal decentralization. This aspect is directly related to the civil service reform and to the development of an increased training capacity at regional level. Capacity to access development funds The EC has focused explicitly on structures and mechanisms for participation in EU Structural Funds 8. It expresses serious concern whether Romania will reap benefit of EU accession, but also in order to preserve the balance of the Union and notes: a) There is lack of clarity on allocation of responsibilities and financial resources between levels; b) Laws on decentralization, the prefectural institution and local finance are being revised, but inconclusively so far 9 ; c) A further need for administrative capacity development is in respect of the administration of structural funds in Romania. Chapter 21 on Regional Policy and coordination of structural instruments reports that Structural Fund regulations are to be revised at the end of 2006 and thus, Member States have to have the necessary institutional structures in place to ensure implementation in a sound and cost effective manner from the point of view of both management and financial control. Likewise, with regard to institutional structures for preparation and Accession Report, page 4; Accession Report, page 8; 9

10 implementation of Structural Funds, co-financing mechanisms at the local level should be clarified 10 ; d) It was also observed that full multi-annual programme budgeting is still needed; e) The partnership principle is seldom put into place, therefore, monitoring and evaluation is weak. These perspectives are generally confirmed by other studies, including those conducted in connection with the World Bank 2005 Public Expenditure Review (PER). Accordingly, there is consensus that the current situation at local levels, as summarized below, poses constraints on local absorptive capacity for EU structural and cohesion funds: absence of or incomplete local mechanisms, resources and structures for local development planning and project preparation. Mechanisms for bringing together the various actors to plan in a coherent and integrated way are also an important requirement of good governance and involvement of civil society in the development of a local investment strategy for growth and employment. Important in the latter exercise would be the development of links between projects. Law no. 500/2002 does provide the framework for local Public Investment Planning, but without access to significant financial resources, this is a hollow provision for local Councils; limited/uneven awareness, knowledge, experience and interest on the part of both elected and appointed local officials in strategic, policy and public investment/ development planning and EC procedures. This is the case despite a number of projects in this connection on the part of UNDP and USAID for example. EC project procedures in particular have been found too complex at the local levels; in addition to perceived complexity of donor procedures, the unreformed domestic budgeting system itself creates an environment of uncertainty. Despite the strengthening of the legal framework through Ordinance no. 45/2003, the local budget remains de facto subordinated. Each year, there is uncertainty over available resources; from a structural point of view, sub-national government is complex, with many layers: commune, city, prefecture, county (Ro. judeţ ) and region. The current debates over decentralization, in that they are so far inconclusive, add to the uncertainty with regard to un-clarified roles and responsibilities as between elected bodies at different levels and between the latter and de-concentrated structures (both ministry operations at the local levels and the prefect as an arm of central government). There also appear missing or unallocated functions; national and regional government institutions fail to work together and maximize their inputs and resources that support economic development. The limited resources available are therefore not effectively utilized because of the lack of coordination and a willingness to work in partnership. The Government shares the view that the above assessment presents an appropriate argument for a concerted unified approach to administrative capacity development to remove the perceived structural impediments to progress. While other Operational Programmes will deal directly with some of the above mentioned deficiencies, the rationale 10 Strengthening institutional capacity and efficiency of public administrations and public services in the next programming period ( ) DG Employment and Social Affairs; 10

11 for a separate OP ACD is to ensure that weaknesses in the policy cycle or in governance do not undermine the overall success of the EU structural funds in Romania. Reform of basic public services and of the public utilities of local interest and consolidation of the process of fiscal and administrative decentralization The reform in the field of decentralisation/deconcentration remains a cornerstone of the PAR agenda. Whilst the existing legal framework envisages enhanced local autonomy, in practice, issues like transparency and local revenue remain to be tackled. A new legal framework for decentralisation is under discussion in the Parliament. The EU recently highlighted serious capacity deficits at the local level that would pose a significant threat to successful fiscal decentralisation if untackled 11. This is being specifically addressed through PHARE supported interventions in civil service reform and the development of a regional training capability through the Regional Training Centers (RTC). It is anticipated that further support will be needed to achieve the PAR vision in a post accession environment. As the decentralisation/deconcentration reforms are fundamental it is proposed that capacity development of local administration structures should form a separate priority axis in the OP ACD and it is intended to receive a significant financial allocation. Lessons learned by EC projects With regard to reform and capacity building at the sub-national levels, lessons learned and observations offered in the earlier cited EC documents highlight: (a) lack of political consensus over goals of decentralisation; (b) an incomplete process regarding deconcentration of public services; (c) ongoing lack of local autonomy; (d) mismatch between transfer competencies and actual resources; (e) limited local revenue earning capacity; (f) transfers have not been matched by advance capacity building preparation and training Human resources in central and local administration Law no. 188/1999 on the Status of the civil servants (amended in 2005) and the secondary legislation based on it represent a first stage within the legislative development of the field of civil service and civil servants. The legal framework has been further improved through adoption of Law no. 161/2003 on certain measures for ensuring transparency within the exercise of civil service positions, public dignities and the business environment, prevention and sanctioning of corruption, which also amends and completes, among others, Law no. 188/ Accession Report 2005; 11

12 The comparative situation of civil servants in the years Change Synthetic indicator (2005/2004) No. % No. % No. % Number of established positions Total number of civil service positions 110, % 112, % 107, % -5.1% Occupied positions 97,142 88% 94,576 84% 91,546 86% -3.2% Vacant positions 13,284 12% 18,271 16% 15,512 14% -15.1% Positions in central versus local administration Number of civil service positions within the central public 65,497 59% 62,707 56% * * -15.0% administration Number of civil service positions within the local public administration 44,929 41% 50,140 44% * * -23.7% Analysis by level High civil servant positions % % % -26.4% Leading civil servant positions 11,824 11% 12,267 11% 10,838 12% -11.6% Executing civil servant positions 98,292 89% 100,334 89% 80,527 88% -19.7% Analysis by nature of position Debutant civil servant positions 3,566 3% 6,286 6% * * + 76%** Permanent civil servant positions 106,860 97% 106,561 94% * * - 0.3%** Occupied Positions Number and percentage of occupied civil service positions within the 60,459 92%# 55,380 88%# 53,312 * -11.8%*** central public administration Number and percentage of occupied civil service positions within the local public administration 36,683 81%# 39,196 78%# 38,234 * +4.2%*** Source: The National Agency of Civil Servants # Percentage of occupied positions to established positions * Not available data ** Change for 2004 over 2003 *** Change for 2005 over 2003 Recruitment Entering the body of civil servants is possible only by way of contest organized by the interested public authority or institution, in compliance with regulations established by NACS. Even if the recruitment sphere is wide, numerous studies revealed the fact that more than half of the civil servants working within the public administration come from restructured state or private industrial enterprises. This is a reason for the massive presence of engineers within the administrative system. Professionalisation of civil servants Statistic data regarding the professionalisation of civil servants reveal an extremely favourable image in terms of the academic qualifications held by civil servants: at the end of 2004, over 75% of the total civil servants within the ministries and other central agencies, over 58% of the civil servants within the deconcentrated services and almost a half of the civil servants within the local administration had long term higher education. This data should be treated with some caution. Due to weaknesses in the recruitment process (which are being addressed), a high percentage of civil servants do not have basic 12

13 studies appropriate to their position. Accordingly, even though the Romanian public administration has a valuable pool of human resources, the professionalisation of the civil servants body does not rise to the expected level or meet the current needs. This is a reason for prioritizing professional training in the OP ACD. Promotion The present legislation does not allow the promotion of persons already employed, this process being realized through contest with the participation of everybody interested and having the qualities requested by the vacant civil service position. A drawback of this approach is that there is no real opportunity for a career structure and it is possible for the promotions to be organized to favour the candidate whose promotion is desired by the institution. Training By law, civil servants have the obligation to attend professional training organized by the National Institute of Administration (NIA) or other institutions established by law with a total length of minimum 7 days a year. Different studies revealed that almost half of the total civil servants did not attend any training course, almost 23% attended only one, and approximately 14% attended two such courses. Payment During , the average salary within the public administration was at the level and a little over the level of the average salary on the economy. It is remarkable that there are significant salary differences among different administrative levels and institutions. Salary reform is a high priority and the OP ACD anticipates that a successful resolution of this issue will emerge before accession. Mobility The overall mobility within the body of civil servants is very low but the annual dynamic within the different categories varies (see above table) between debutant (+76%) and permanent civil servants (-0.3%). The trend for debutant civil servants reflects the rejuvenation of human resources within the public administration. 13

14 2 SWOT ANALYSIS The SWOT analysis developed for the OP ACD is based on the current situation analyses of the above-mentioned sectors and on the contributions to a workshop held in November 2005 that involved the key stakeholders in the PAR report process. The same SWOT analysis was used for the development of the National Development Plan. The SWOT analysis in its summary form is set out overleaf. The listing of strengths identifies that the key critical elements necessary for successful reform an educated workforce, a developing information and communications architecture and perhaps, of greatest importance, strong political and administrative support for the objectives of reform are present. The weaknesses that emerged from the SWOT analysis support the approach for reform at both central and local levels of administration, and in particular a reshaping and transfer of functions between central and local level. This is seen as the primary need for intervention. The final objective of this rationalization of functions between central and local administration is a visible improvement in public services that would support economic and social cohesion. The SWOT analysis identified a large number of opportunities and this is partially a reflection of the progress in capacity development that has been made so far. The threats that emerged from the SWOT analysis also influenced the choice of priority axes and key areas of intervention. 14

15 SWOT Analysis STRENGTHS HR stability High percentage of civil servants with university degrees Positive dynamics of the variation of civil servants with university degrees Continuous training of civil servants A quite developed IT infrastructure Political will for public administration reform OPPORTUNITIES A more efficient coordination of the reform of public administration through strengthening of CUPAR s role. Introducing modern methods of institutional evaluation and strategic planning. Reducing bureaucracy and simplifying some administrative procedures Developing partnerships in a wide range of areas of public policies and at the local and central level Existence of networks and well informed final beneficiaries on which to build a development programme of technical and administrative capacity in local administration Readiness to absorb structural funds in Romania WEAKNESSES Deficiencies in civil servants recruiting system Lack of a unitary wage system Lack of rationalisation of structures at central and local levels Low administrative capacity of the authorities of local public administration Low financial resources of local public authorities Difficult procedures, which in many cases are not transparent, regarding the redistribution of revenues The degree of state centralization is high Deficient management of public institutions Lack of a real career in civil service which reduces its attractiveness to well-trained young people THREATS The migration of well-trained civil servants towards other economic sectors Lack of development of administrative capacity necessary to take over decentralised attributions Increase of the ageing phenomenon of the HR Reducing the administrative capacity and the socio-economic development by continuing administrative fragmentation Increasing citizens lack of trust in public administration Difficulty in extending local services to remote areas Delivering inefficient or very expensive public services 15

16 3 STRATEGY The OP ACD contributes to the implementation of the fourth National Development Priority of the NDP Development of human resources, employment, social inclusion and strengthening administrative capacity so as to obtain the highest positive impact upon public administration in order to stimulate the economic development. OP ACD is designed to substantially contribute to the achievement of the thematic priority Building Effective Administrative Capacity established in the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF). The OP ACD is also related with the priorities laid down in the Community Strategic Guidelines (CSG) for Cohesion Policy, where investment in administrative capacity development is needed. In many policy areas, the revised Lisbon Strategy is calling for better legislation, policy design, quality services that are customer focussed and effective delivery to create the conditions for economic growth and job creation. Member States are encouraged to pursue their own initiatives including establishing regulatory and legislative systems, notably in respect of sectors where the social and economic potential is still underutilized. These requirements necessitate effective institutions and administrations capable to develop and implement relevant policies Objectives General objective The general objective of the OP ACD is to contribute to the achievement of EU and national objectives to make progress in socio-economic development in line with cohesion and convergence goals. The achievement of the general objective will be reflected by the increase in economic activity across Romania, the increase in employment and measurable improvements in the delivery of public services at central and local levels of administration. These achievements will have some direct association to the successful implementation of a package of public administrative reforms that target the strengthening of management capacity. Specific objective The specific objective is to contribute to a sustainable improvement in public administration in Romania. The specific objective will be assessed by a comparison of sectoral performance of the Romanian public service to other new member states and the EU member states as a whole. One focus of this OP is on improving management functions in public administration. The indicators of achievement at specific objective level will be measurable through a built-in monitoring and evaluation component of reform. These will provide feedback on the relative success of the implementation of strategic plans across the administration. It is also envisaged that a small package of macro indicators including the overall cost of running the public service as a percentage of GDP and the numbers and proportion (between central and local levels of administration) of the public sector positions will also be monitored. Other potential indicators will be the change in the level of sustainable 16

17 economic development achieved and knowledge learning indicators like the level of budget allocation to training and development as a percentage of total payroll expenditure List of Priority Axes Priority Axis 1: Priority Axis 2: Priority Axis 3: Strengthen public policy interventions in the central administration Capacity development to improve the service performance of local administration Technical Assistance Priority Axis 1 Strengthen public policy interventions in the central administration Objective The objective of priority axis 1 is to contribute to the development of administrative capacity of the Romanian central administration. The reforms seek to modernise and integrate work processes for the formulation of public policy proposals (PPPs) and their linkage to institutional strategic plans (ISPs); completion of civil service reforms that focus on the rationalisation of central administration structures, implementation of performance management and strengthening the underpinning of the reforms through sustainable training interventions; and the introduction of an output and outcome monitoring and evaluation culture. Policy Cycle Interventions Development of Monitoring & Evaluation Culture Public Policy Proposals & Institutional Strategic Plans Civil Service Reforms These reforms are viewed as an integrated package to be progressively implemented across the central administration with priority for those sectors contributing to economic growth. The reforms are collectively referred to as public policy cycle interventions. 17

18 Rationale Priority Axis 1 is concerned with strengthening the institutional management capacity of ministries and their associated institutions by reforming the decision making process, and implementing a strategic management approach to the allocation of resources and the measurement of performance. The reforms aim to provide high and leading civil servants with the knowledge and tools to enhance performance. They include the introduction of a modern organisational performance culture using monitoring and evaluation of outputs and outcomes. They cater for the implementation of a set of civil service reforms to complete the transformation of the relationship between political and administrative functions at central administration (already provided for in legislation) and bring the changes down to the level of the individual civil servant. This is regarded as fundamental to the success of the overall initiative. While pre-accession assistance has contributed to the transformation of the legislative and administrative foundations of government, the pace of modernisation has been restricted by uneven progress in reform initiatives, some gaps in the rationalisation of structures, and a lack of basic infrastructure and capacity. Thus, progress in strengthening policy formulation and civil service reform has been slower than expected. The package of reforms will complete the work initiated under Phare and other pre-accession assistance and consistently emphasised in the public administrative reform priorities of successive governments. This should allow for some of the more fundamental elements of reform like strategic planning and performance management to be launched early in the next programming period. The public policy cycle interventions are also among the cornerstones of good governance and support open government, and improvements in the management of civil servants. The Government regards the rationalisation of administrative structures, the strengthening of management capabilities in a politically neutral civil service and the strengthening of the ability to implement co-ordinated policy instruments as being fundamental to the successful formulation and implementation of the policies that will deliver balanced sustainable economic growth in the longer term. The key areas of intervention identified for this priority were selected as being appropriate to the objectives of the ESF while most closely supporting the current stage of the reform efforts. It is recognised that the reforms targeted in this priority will take several years to come to fruition. This was taken into account in the selection of result indicators. The priority axis also highlights the critical need for top level support for the successful achievement of the reform objectives. Accordingly, special attention will be given to the development of the senior civil service in this priority axis. Relevant latest data (2005) regarding the number of civil servants within the central administration, grouped by ministries and by specific professional positions (in HR, IT, financial, audit departments, etc) was collected to support the financial estimates for the priority axis. These will be used to provide a clear estimation of the effort needed for change management issues, in terms of numbers of target beneficiaries and financial needs. The flexibility rule for ERDF-type interventions will apply. 18

19 Key Areas of Intervention - Activities for the management of the reforms - Capacity to formulate public policy, including inter-institutional sectoral strategies and institutional strategic plans - Implement Civil Service Reform - Implement programme monitoring and evaluation Indicators Output Indicators Target Result Indicators Target Number of reform plans produced; Number of ministries that implement the reform packages; Number of studies and surveys carried out; Number of sectoral policies and institutional strategic plans produced under the reform; Number of inter-institutional policy working groups supported; Number of rationalisation studies produced; Number of civil servants trained in the performance management system. Number of Sectoral policies implemented through the institutional strategic plans; Number of rationalisation recommendations that are approved by government and that are implemented; Changes in trend in the performance ratings for civil servants Activities for the management of the reforms A basic part of the OP strategy is to bring together a package of reforms associated with public management methods. The current ownership of these reforms (the managing parties) is shared among different government organisations including CUPAR, PPU and MPF. This key area of intervention will support the co-ordination of the reform effort between the above participating bodies, will encourage them to collaborate of the design of further reform initiatives and support their efforts to manage, co-ordinate and refine each of the reforms during implementation. The implementation of the package of public policy cycle interventions will lead to a rapid development of the working toolkit of civil servants. While it is important that each ministry and institution is responsible for the implementation of the package, there is a danger that the implementation of the reforms could become fragmented and sub-optimal. This key area of intervention will be used to support co-ordination and collaboration efforts to find the best (good practice) solutions to common problems. It will support the efforts of working groups drawn from the implementing ministries for the sharing of good practice, for example in design, specification and contracting activities. It will also seek to produce uniform standards for the documentation of the systems, practices and procedures that underpin the package of reforms. It is also intended that there will be facilities to include in the implementation of the package of reforms, emerging thinking in areas like knowledge management and the innovative use of technology in administration. 19

20 The indicative operations supported under this key area are likely to include: Studies and research of reform experiences in other member states including short study visits; Technical assistance with the drafting of an integrated management reform framework and implementation methodologies and guidance; Consultations and surveys of opinions of targeted beneficiaries on the progress of the reforms; Organization of brainstorming events, co-ordination between the management parties, commissioning of analytical research to support the maintenance of the individual reforms and their integration; Support to the design of further policy related performance enhancing reforms such as regulatory impact assessments; risk management; development of the role of high civil servants; Specific consideration will be given to identifying ways of implementing the reforms as an integrated package of reforms in ministries and institutions that possess sufficient absorption capacity for this complex task. This is expected to include those sectors responsible for major contribution to economic growth; Provide for support to working groups for the capture of good practice and the specification of standards for the supporting documentation of the reforms; Provide for the study and development of advance reform issues like knowledge management and the innovative use of technology in administration Capacity to formulate public policy, including inter-institutional sectoral strategies and institutional strategic plans The overall success of the implementation of the management reforms will depend on the extent to which they are implemented in an integrated way. The pursuit of a management by objectives approach automatically creates some linkages, for example, at the formulation level between Sectoral policy objectives and institutional strategic priorities and at the implementation level between the objectives in strategic plans and the results and impacts that might be targeted in internal performance evaluation. The Government is keen to accelerate the implementation of these reforms in those ministries that make a direct contribution to economic growth, employment creation, local development and good governance. Accordingly, the eligible organisations will be provisionally divided into priority waves, taking into account the extent and urgency of reforms needed. The anticipated indicative operations involve support to the implementation plans currently being drawn up with Phare assistance. These include: The public policy planning process Implement procedures for designing, implementing and evaluating public policy proposals including the requirement for PPPs to be accepted at the political level (i.e. the Government); 20

21 Provide the training and implementation support to introduce the principles, standards and rules of procedure for policy formulation as set out in the regulations or normative act. This shall include strategies, programmes, public policy proposals, practical support for the drafting of policy documents, cost benefit analysis for the public policy proposals; Develop and implement procedures for regulatory impact assessment within the policy formulation process; Provide assistance to the communication and consultation processes for policy formulation, including the conduct of meetings at different levels (whole-ofgovernment, political, inter-institutional levels, and national consultation mechanisms with social partners). Legislative drafting Strengthen the inter-ministerial coordination process for the whole policy cycle - from the very beginning of putting a draft normative act for consultations; preparatory meetings at an earlier stage of consultations. This includes support to the functioning of the inter-ministerial councils; Study the potential use of IT in document circulation and accessibility and bring forward implementation proposals; Strengthen the Legal Department of the Government Secretariat. Institutional strategic planning Develop the role of the Strategic Planning Council in deciding on strategic priorities through increased capacity for brainstorming sessions, preparation of SWOT analysis. Provide training on the strategic planning methodology. ( the rules of the game ); Support the linkage of strategic plans to the multi-annual budgeting framework. The ISP should not be separated from the line ministry Annual Plans. Such plans could have unified format consisting of activities related to the key priorities of the Government (as spelled out in the ISP) and other measures and activities that are needed for meeting other priority statements of the Government and sector s development in general; Implement sectoral strategic planning. The strategic planning and program creation part requires a strengthening of co-ordination between the Ministry of Finance and the GSG PPU, too. A good program structure is essential for effective policy management; Develop and deliver training material on the background work for preparing and implementing a Sectoral strategy; support action learning programmes and mentoring of pilot implementation of inter-institutional collaboration; Undertake studies to inform key elements of a Sectoral planning approach, for example, territorial planning; prepare policy and practice handbooks and supporting training material; Strengthen the capacities for good data gathering, research and analysis. Support the practical implementation of good practice in Sectoral planning, monitoring and evaluation, including the integration of Sectoral strategies into institutional strategies. 21