1. Assessing Progress on SA’s Strategic Plan Presentation to the Australasian Evaluation Society (SA Branch) Wednesday 28 June 2006 By Tanya Smith Executive Director, Office of the Executive Committee of Cabinet

2. SA Strategic Plan 6 objectives, 84 targets, ±10 years Comprehensive, ambitious and grounded in measurable goals Aims for deep, enduring change:  in how government thinks and operates  in government’s engagement with and responsiveness to community

3. First principles It’s about results, not efforts.

4. How has it been implemented Top-down / centre-out:  Cabinet committee oversight (ExComm)  Linkage to CE performance agreements Bottom-up / outside-in:  Interest groups and other stakeholders  Boards and advisory councils Common denominators:  Alignment and ownership

5. How the Audit Committee fits in Representatives from five advisory boards Operational since August 2004 Advises ExComm on: –Interpretation, data sources, measures and baselines –Recorded progress/lack of towards targets Commitment to 2-yearly public reports First to be released 30 June

6. Progress ‘score card’ report Independent, ‘spin-free’ snapshot January 2006 cut-off for most data Literal interpretation of target achievement No comment on strategies provided Five categories assigned: –At or better than target level –On track to achieve in time –Progress but unlikely to meet –Little/no/backwards progress –Unclear – data not available/problematic

7. The good news… Strong endorsement of the plan Impressive performance towards achieving the targets overall Good, readable report for the congress Explicit recommendations for updating the plan Will help with advisory board and wider community “buy-in”

8. Further work required… Target-specific data issues – around 19 targets categorised as ‘unclear’ Cross-government data issues – ad hoc, duplication of effort, confidentiality concerns Regional data – a particular concern Wording of targets – allows for “technical” successes and failures

9. The ‘unclear’ targets No new data available –Census (e.g. homelessness) –Source has dried up (e.g. Florida) –Problems with definitions (e.g. audiovisual sector) –Problems with comparators (e.g. cost- effectiveness of public service) –There’s just no measure yet (e.g. regional infrastructure)

10. Cross-government data issues Lack of coordination –Duplication of effort (in collection, analysis and dissemination) –Patchiness of coverage (agency-led surveys) –Uncertain regularity (a lot of “one-offs”) Reluctance to share –Who knows who’s doing what? –Who says we can have that?

11. Regional data Very limited Very dated No consensus on defining regions Other localised sources are less reliable or not credible

12. Wording of targets Technical wins/losses: “Increase investment in strategic areas of infrastructure…” Baffling concepts: “Raise the lowest income of South Australians relative to those of the average South Australian” Ambiguous terms: “Reduce the percentage of South Australians who are overweight or obese”

13. Thoughts for the update Get SMART – targets which are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound Outputs vs. outcomes - consider prioritising and/or grouping in appropriate hierarchies Include ‘milestones’ where the target has a long timeframe Disaggregate data and drill down to regions where possible Draw on the resources of the ABS and Audit Committee

14. Thoughts for implementation We need to be better at –Strategic planning –Project management –Aligning people to the plan –Aligning budgets with the plan –Evaluation –Trusting and collaborating with the community –Turning ideas into policy decisions into action

15. Back to the good news Still the best thing going – being copied elsewhere Is making a difference Community is rallying Update process will be thorough Political commitment still evident We’re all a lot smarter!

16. www.saplan.org.au