OECD Public Governance Reviews: Palestinian Authority

5. Overview of Recommendations to Strengthen Public Administration Reform Efforts in the Palestinian Authority

Abstract

Based on the challenges and opportunities identified in previous chapters, this section provides an overview of the recommendations to improve the development and implementation of PAR in the Palestinian Authority.

Overview of recommendations to strengthen public administration reform efforts in the Palestinian Authority

Recommendations to develop a coherent strategic framework for public administration reform

• The PA should consider widening the scope of the existing PAR strategic framework by addressing important reform areas in line with the NDP and identifying clear leadership per each of them. Specific attention should be paid to the development of:

  • a roadmap which outlines specific steps and tools to allow for more expenditure efficiency, notably by reducing costs while maintaining the desired level of administrative capacities

  • a roadmap which outlines specific steps and tools to enhance engagement with the civil society at large throughout the whole policy cycle, from problem analysis to evaluation of impacts

  • a roadmap which outlines specific steps and tools to progressively improve policy development, co-ordination, and monitoring in view of increasing expenditure effectiveness

• The Government should carry out a comprehensive evaluation of the whole PAR agenda to inform the future design of reforms after the PAR strategic documents expire. Clarity on the development of one single cross-cutting PAR strategy or the added value of separate strategic documents should be included at an early stage. This evaluation would encompass the key milestones and identifies the most important stakeholders with their related roles and contributions.

Dedicated recommendations on the thematic strategic frameworks for public administration reform

On the Sectoral Strategy of the Civil Service 2021-2023

• Reconsider the formulation of objectives to clarify the sought improvements in the different civil service and human resources areas.

• Identify outcome level indicators to measure progress towards the achievement of the above-mentioned sought improvements and to feed policy discussions within the government and with the civil society.

• Better define implementation arrangements and co-operation with other institutions contributing to GPC objectives and make sure that roles and responsibilities are agreed and consistently translated into the respective action plans.

• Better identify financial gaps in relation to planned objectives, which can purposely be used to discuss potential support with external donors.

On the Technology and Public Administration Strategy 2021-2023

• Undertake policy discussions with the GS and the civil society to effectively address administrative red tapes before proceeding with digitalisation of services.

• Engage with citizens, the civil society, and the relevant ministerial and non-ministerial institutions for more precise prioritisation of services, and make decisions publicly available

• Better identify financial gaps in relation to planned objectives, which can purposely be used to discuss potential support with external donors.

On the National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022

• Identify outcome level indicators to measure progress the four strategic objectives and expected results and to feed policy discussions within the government and with the civil society.

On the Cross-Sectoral Gender Strategy for 2021-2023

• Further clarify the steering, co-ordination, and monitoring arrangements.

• Further link resources to individual objectives and further connect performance indicators with budget lines.

On the Sectoral strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 – 2023

• Clarify implementation responsibilities and the steering, co-ordination, and monitoring arrangements

• Link resources to individual objectives, and ideally to implementing partners, and further connect performance indicators with budget lines.

Recommendations towards strengthening the evidence base for public administration reform

• The PA could strengthen its existing methods for problem analysis and policy identification by including more sources of evidence such as performance information, audit reports, internal and external evaluations, and expenditure reports.

• The PA could build further on the existing but uneven practices for the involvement of internal and external stakeholders in problem analysis (i.e., decision-makers, managers, technical staff, external service users, NGOs, research centres, academia, the private sector, etc.).

• The PA may consider complementing the recently issued Guidelines 2024-2029 with annexes providing for:

  • more detailed guidance on how to use recommended problem analysis tools, i.e., the problem tree

  • clearer standard procedures and quality requirements for the involvement of all the relevant institutional and non-state stakeholders during the stages of problem identification, discussion, and validation of the analytical results.

  • A quality control mechanism in line institutions and within the PMO should ensure the consistent application of these procedures and requirements.

Recommendations to improve institutional leadership on public administration reform

• The PA should further clarify responsibilities for steering, implementing, and monitoring PAR at the CoG.

• The PA is encouraged to not only have clear lead institutions for the thematic PAR areas, but also for pursuing a whole-of-government approach in its wide array of PAR efforts.

• If the PA decides to extend the scope of PAR, it should identify lead institutions for the PAR areas currently not covered by the strategic framework, notably policy development, co-ordination and monitoring, and organisation and functions of public administration.

• The PA could install clear organisational and individual accountability lines among the relevant stakeholders and involved institutions. This entails a delegation of responsibility cascading down from the lead PAR institution through the institutions leading individual PAR areas, towards the other contributing institutions regarding the achievement of planned objectives.

Recommendations to improve institutional co-ordination on public administration reform

• The PA should consider enhancing the CoG’s existing PAR management structures at both the political and administrative levels and empower them with strong authority to steer and support reform implementation. The CoG’s PAR management structures should include all institutions with a stake in the reform process, and their scope should encompass all PAR areas.

• With reference to individual PAR areas, the PA could ensure stability of the existing co-ordination bodies at both political and technical level, to further clarify the PAR co-ordination mechanisms, the roles, and responsibilities of all relevant stakeholders and to set standard co-ordination procedures.

• The PA could actively involve the civil society in the PAR management bodies. This would add value to policy discussions and confirm commitment towards more transparency and accountability. For this reason, the association of the SAACB is also recommended.

Recommendation on improving the prioritisation of public administration reform objectives

• Within each PAR area, the PA should invest efforts in better prioritisation of objectives by focusing on a limited number of carefully analysed, agreed, and prioritised issues, in line with the financial circumstances and the most pressing needs in the society.

• Prioritisation exercises at the level of each PAR strategy should build on the evidence collected during the problem analysis phase, including consultations with both internal and external stakeholders. They should involve high-ranking officials holding decision-making power such as high representatives of the major implementing institutions and the heads of the Programme Management Teams.

• The different steps for prioritisation and objective setting should be clearly presented in methodological guidelines, which could be integrated in the new Guidelines 2024-2029 or presented in an annex. Practical tools for prioritisation and objective setting could also be provided. Consistent application of these procedural steps should also be continuously verified by the policy units within ministerial and non-ministerial institutions, and by the PMO as well.

Effective operationalisation of public administration reform objectives

• The PA could review the current operational plans for PAR to ensure that they are aligned and consist of clear outputs, operational responsibilities, and a concrete implementation timeframe.

• The PA could ensure that operational plans only describe focused actions leading to the envisaged results with the available resources.

• The PA could organise interactive sessions such as focus groups and brainstorming sessions with all the institutions contributing to PAR efforts to ensure that the results of the problem analysis, the defined problems and their causes are well understood, the best set of reform-oriented actions are designed to tackle them, and that roles and responsibilities are clear and agreed on.

Recommendations on effective monitoring for public administration reform

• The PA should ensure that the Strategic Results Framework, which is currently used to monitor the implementation of the NPD and the GRA, allows for measuring progress towards expected improvements, rather than the outputs of the different reform measures. The same apply to the renewed Strategic Results Framework, once defined, which shall allow for measuring progress towards GP’s priorities.

• The PA could ensure alignment between the monitoring framework of the different (PAR) sector and cross-cutting strategies and the current, and future Strategic Results Framework.

• The PA could ensure that regular meetings take place among all the relevant PAR institutions (both CoG and line institutions) to discuss progress towards expected improvements, challenges faced and ahead, effectiveness of expenditures, and follow-up on findings and decisions taken.

• The PA could enhance systematic circulation of monitoring information among the CoG institutions and with all the (PAR) relevant institutions. Co-ordination of the monitoring efforts should be strengthened between the PMO and the GS.

• The PA could clarify the mandate of dedicated monitoring and evaluation departments within the administrations to ensure a uniform approach across all institutions and frameworks.

• Given the disparity of capacities across the public administration, the PA is encouraged to keep reinforcing capacities in the planning and monitoring units in line institutions. This can be done through increased trainings and the further allocation of resources.

• The PA could systematically associate the SAACB throughout the process of monitoring PAR efforts, building on its experiences and available data sources.

Recommendation on leveraging costing and expenditure efforts for public administration reform

• The PA should include clear information about sources of financing in the strategic documents for PAR. In addition, in view of the next planning cycle 2024-2029, the PA may consider adding dedicated columns in “Table C: Budget overview 2024-2029” to specify whether allocated funds come for the internal budget or require external financial support. Ensuring that financial gaps are clearly, and systematically identified would increase credibility of reform plans and better inform policy discussions with external donors.

• In line with what the new Guidelines 2024-2029 propose, the PA could aggregate cost estimates per strategic objective to better compare the costing of reforms with the expected improvements and assess its expenditure effectiveness.

• The PA could keep reinforcing capacities in the financial units in line institutions. This can be done through increased trainings and the further allocation of resources.

• The PA needs to harmonise cost estimation methodologies and ensure uniform practices for cost estimations. More detailed guidance on cost estimation methodologies could be presented in an annex to the new Guidelines 2024-2029.

Recommendations to leverage Human Resources Management for public administration reform

• The PA should encourage the adoption of merit, performance, neutrality and impartiality as core principles and values for civil servants.

• The PA should focus on the development of transversal and future-oriented competencies. This could be done through a series of actions such as a competency gap analysis led by the GPC in co-operation with key line ministries.

• The PA should apply competencies in the recruitment process. This could be done through a series of actions such as defining core competencies for each job posting based on a revised competency framework.

• The PA should focus on applying competencies in performance management processes. This could be done through a series of actions such as piloting a revised performance management process based around competencies, with the support of the GPC and/or international partners.

• The PA should continue its focus on providing opportunities for continual learning for all civil servants.

Recommendation on improving accountability and transparency for public administration reform through stakeholder participation

• The PA should move forward with the adoption of a Law on Access to Information in line with international standards and good practices.

• While awaiting the adoption of the Law on Access to Information, the PA could mainstream existing good practices regarding the archiving of public records throughout the entire administration while already sharing progress reports, strategic and planning documents. Especially regarding the existing PAR committees where the meeting agenda’s, work plans, minutes could be made available on the PA’s web portal.

• The PA could provide for mandatory publication of reports concerning the implementation of thematic and cross-cutting strategies, especially regarding the NDP and the GRA.

• The PA could institutionalise stakeholder participation and consultation to improve the quality and effectiveness of public policies in general and more specifically for PAR, see (OECD, 2022[1]).

Reference

[1] OECD (2022), Rule of Law and Governance in the Palestinian Authority: Delivering Better Policies and Legislation for People, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/68ffa992-en.