Principles of Results Framework Document Development of a ...
Transcript of Principles of Results Framework Document Development of a ...
Development of a Long-term Policy
Document on provision of citizen-centric
administrative services by central state
institutions
Principles of Results
Framework
Document
October 2015
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 2
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 3
Document Control
Project Title
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central
state institutions.
Engagement Reference
Contract for professional services No. # 06/2015 between UNDP and PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit sh.p.k.
Document Title
Principles of Results Framework (RF).
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 4
Disclaimer
This report (“the Report”) has been prepared in accordance with the terms of our engagement and for no other
purpose. The contents of the Report as well as any other information or comments made thereafter are cannot
be published, distributed, copied or given to any third party. The recipient of this Report has been informed
regarding the confidentiality of the information and is aware that it cannot be used for any other purposes but
those of the specific assignment. We do not accept or assume any liability or duty of care for any other purpose
or to any third party to whom this document is shown.
This Report contains information that has been obtained from various sources as indicated in the Report. We
have sought to establish the reliability of these sources as far as possible, however, no representation or
warranty of any kind (whether express or implied) is given by PwC to any person as to the accuracy or
completeness of the information. The scope of our services was not designed to enable us to express an opinion
and therefore PwC does not express an opinion regarding the presented information.
This is a Report, based on which we expect to receive feedback and comments. The comments obtained will be
taken into account and presented in the final Report.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 5
Contents
Purpose of this document 7
Introduction 9
Key Principles of Results Framework 13
Benefits of Results Framework 19
Key Challenges 21
Managing the RF Process 24
Way Forward 27
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 6
Glossary
Abbreviation Meaning
GoA Government of Albania
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IT Information Technology
KPI Key Performance Indicator
MDA Ministry, Department, Agency M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
RF Results Framework
RFD Result Framework Document
ToR Terms of Reference
UNDP United Nations Development Program
VMO Vision, Mission & Objectives
WP Work Plan
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 7
Purpose of this document
PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit sh.pk (PwC) has been appointed by UNDP for consultancy for ‘Development of a
long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions
in Albania; as per Letter of Award dated 29 July 2015, RFP dated 04 May 2015 and our proposal dated 22 May
2015. One of the key deliverables includes drafting Principles of Results Framework (RF) for the policy
document.
The RF provides a summary of the most important results that a specific program or initiative expects to
achieve during a defined period of time, which is typically a financial year. The RF serves two main purposes:
Move the focus of the Government from process-orientation to result-orientation
Provide an objective and fair basis to evaluate the program’s overall performance at the end of the
defined period
These principles will help in the creation of the Results Framework Document (RFD) template for the
Government, which will need to be filled up by the respective Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDA1s)
individually, based on their roles, responsibilities, functional mandate and programs. This report identifies and
discusses the key principles associated with the development and adoption of a RF within the Government of
Albania.
Once finalized and adopted, these principles will serve as a reference guideline for any Government Ministry,
Department and Agency or institute for the development and implementation of its Result Framework
Document.
The objective of this document is to provide for the reference principles and framework for adoption and implementation of the RF within the GoA. The document has been intentionally kept at a high level as it only discusses the key principles.
1 MDA refer to the Ministry, Department and Agencies and institutes within the GoA
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 8
Introduction
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 9
Introduction
Government institutions deliver services essential to the well-being and development of the nation. To ensure
that the public service delivery is as efficient and economical as possible, all Government institutions are
required to formulate strategic plans, allocate resources to the implementation of those plans, and monitor and
report the results. In order to achieve its objectives various projects, programs and initiatives are undertaken by
the Government. However, it is essential to focus the attention of the public and oversight bodies on whether
Government institutions are performing against their objectives, goals, service delivery plans or there is need to
alert decision makers to areas, where corrective action is required.
It is difficult to know if programs have succeeded or failed if the expected results are not clearly articulated. An
explicit definition of results - precisely what is to be achieved through the project or program and by when—
keeps measurable objectives in sight, helps monitor progress toward those objectives, and assists with
adjustment and management of program implementation. Making the best use of available data and knowledge
is crucial for improving the execution of the Government's mandate.
A results framework serves as a key tool in the development landscape, enabling Government officials as end-
users to discuss and establish strategic development objectives and then link interventions to intermediate
outcomes and results that directly relate to those objectives.
The RF provides a summary of the most important results that a specific program or initiative expects to
achieve during a defined period of time, which is typically a financial year. The RF serves two main purposes:
Move the focus of the Government from process-orientation to result-orientation
Provide an objective and fair basis to evaluate programs overall performance at the end of the defined
period
The introduction of a Result Framework system in a public institution or on a country-wide basis presents a
significant challenge, which requires both organizational changes as well as cultural changes within the
Government MDAs. This is even more significant considering that different MDAs are at different levels of
readiness, maturity and capacity and have their specific mandates and visions.
To be effective, RF needs to be positioned as far more than a technical instrument for change. It is not enough
to simply create a highly trained evaluation capacity and expect that organizations and systems will eventually
become more effective. A result framework that incorporates the best elements of design, standardizing
different mandates and good governance principles with necessary checks and balances will form the
foundations of an acceptable evaluation system. There is a need to also address the institutional capacity and
indeed the drivers that are generating the demand for evaluation.
The following diagram depicts the key enablers, which are essential for the development, implementation and
sustainability of a Result Framework.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 10
Vision
This refers to the understanding as to how the Result Framework information can assist public sector managers
and decision makers. This of course requires strategic leadership as well as a clear understanding of the basic
concepts and potential uses of the Result Framework.
Enabling Environment
This is a fundamental requirement for ensuring a commitment to not only launch a Result Framework exercise
but also to sustain it over the long-term. This translates into a commitment to resource such an exercise, as well
as providing an enabling environment to allow it to develop and mature. Given that the introduction of a
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system might challenge the current culture and the way of doing things
within Government organizations, political will and leadership are essential to support the values and ethics
that underlie a successful Result Framework exercise; that is, transparency, objectivity, accountability and a
commitment to a ‘results’-orientation and good governance.
Participation Planning
It is important to identify intended participant and measures to ensure participation. There is a need to develop
a schedule and plan out the process for engaging partners and stakeholders.
Conduct RFD development sessions with intended participants
Develop a preliminary results framework and hold sessions with key counterparts to present the draft
strategy and obtain feedback
Capacity and Infrastructure
Capacity includes both the existence of credible and relevant data and information-gathering systems as well as
the skilled personnel to gather, analyze and report on the performance of Government policies and programs.
Demand and Use Result Framework Information
Capacity to ‘use’ RF information requires both a clarity of expectations re where and how RF information is
intended to be used within Government organizations (e.g. planning, policy or program development; decision-
making; budgeting), as well as the capacity within Government institutions to actually incorporate and use the
RF information as part of the normal process of business.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 11
Appropriate Approach
Structured workshops and session may be conducted to construct the results framework. Focus should be on
drawing out the ideas of the group and translating them into the results framework.
Timing
It is very important to assess when the results frameworks should be developed. Success of the activity depends
upon the amount of program information and data available to confidently construct a results framework. So it
is important to identify the time to initiate, considering the available data.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 12
Key Principles of
Results Framework
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 13
Key Principles of Results Framework
This section discusses the key principles of the Results Framework (RF). As depicted in the below diagram,
there are broadly six key principles of RF. These principles become the basis of the formulation of the Results
Framework Document (RFD) for any MDA. The RFD has to be developed by the MDAs at an individual level
and once approved at the Government level, this RFD becomes the basis for monitoring and assessing the
performance and the outcomes of the programs and initiatives for the respective MDA.
Core Values
Core Values refer to the foundation principles for any Government
MDA or institute including Vision, Mission, Objectives (VMO) and
functions.
Core Values should capture the ‘Vision’ to identify the big
picture for the MDA or institute as envisaged by the
Government leadership
o Vision statement will be clear and long term, resulting
from existence of MDA
o Vision should have a time horizon of 5-10 years
It is important to include the ‘Mission’ as part of the RFD
because this ‘Mission’ in a way defines the purpose of existence of the MDA or institute
Objectives include the overall goals, purpose and mission of a business that have been established by its
management and communicated to its employees
o Objectives of a Department typically focus on its long range intentions for operating and its overall
governing philosophy that can provide useful guidance for stakeholders and beneficiaries
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Key Principles of RF
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 14
o Objectives should be linked and derived from the Departmental Vision and Mission statements and
should remain stable over time
Functions should be consistent with the allocation of business rules for the MDA or institute and they
cannot be changed in the RFD unless there is a change in the basic functions
Targets and Performance Indicators
It is essential to assess clearly how the Government is able to
deliver on its mandate and this requires identifying performance
indicators, against which assessment can be done. It is challenging
to specify indicators that measure things that are useful from a
management and accountability perspective. There is a need to be
selective when defining indicators. Defining a good performance
indicator requires careful analysis of what is to be measured.
First step is to shortlist key objectives that would be the focus for
the current RFD. It is important to be selective and focus on the
most important and relevant objectives only:
Objectives may be prioritized according to the degree of
significance
For each specific objective, the department must specify and map the required policies, programs, schemes
and projects
Performance Indicators: This helps in ascertaining level of how well a Department is meeting its aims and
objectives, and which policies and processes are working. Defining a good performance indicator requires
careful analysis of what is to be measured. The following steps can be followed while defining or identifying the
performance indicators as part of the RFD:
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 15
Agree on the problem those needs to address
Understand the desired changes to define a clear set of outcomes and impacts
Need to assess what it needs to deliver to achieve the set outcome
Specify the outputs, activities and inputs the institution needs to do to achieve the desired outcomes and
impacts
With the help of the desired outcomes and impacts, identify and shortlist the indicators which are required
to service delivery related aspects such as process efficiencies, etc. Select the most important indicators
needed to measure key aspect of service delivery and outputs
Following aspects should be considered while finalizing the indicators:
o The selected indicator communicates whether the Department is achieving the strategic goals and set
objectives
o The indicator is clear and easily understood by stakeholders who will be using it
o The data is readily available for the selected indicator
It is important to have a thorough understanding of the nature of the input, key activities, desired outcomes and
impact along with all the relevant definitions and standards used in the field or domain of the MDA and hence it
is crucial to involve subject matter experts and line managers in the above process.
Targets: Once a set of suitable
indicators has been defined for a
program or a project, the next step
is to specify the level of
performance the institution and its
employees will strive to achieve.
Communicate what will be
achieved if the current policies
and programs are maintained
Enable performance to be
compared at regular intervals -
on a monthly, quarterly or
annual basis as appropriate
Facilitate evaluations of the
appropriateness of current
policies and programs
One of the Performance
frameworks adopted globally, which
defines a useful set of criteria for
selecting performance targets, is the
“SMART” criteria, depicted with
the help of the adjacent diagram.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 16
Assess Past Performance
In order to be realistic and analyze the present performance, it is
important to thoroughly assess past performance information for
comparison. For every success indicator and the corresponding
target, RFD must include values for the past few years and also
projected values for the future. The period of past and future
performance may be selected considering data availability.
The inclusion of data for the past years vis-a-vis the projection for
the next few years will help in assessing the target for the current
year. If an action is being initiated in the current year, then data
for the previous year is not required.
Delivery Commitments
In a Government set up it is common that there is a lot of flow of
information & data among various Ministries and Departments. In
some cases the service delivery may involve efforts from multiple
departments. Hence it is important to capture information that
impacts the department’s performance and are critical for
achievement of the selected Success Indicator. Apart from the
Delivery Commitments of the government MDA, which are
identified in line with its mandate, VMO and annual plans, it is also
important to understand and ascertain the requirements,
dependencies and expectations from other MDAs, which directly or
indirectly impact the performance of the institute. Such
requirements, dependencies and expectations should be mentioned
in quantifiable, specific, and measurable terms as part of the RF
under this component.
Outcome and Impact
Though the evaluation through RF will be done against the
identified targets, it is essential to understand expected outcome
and impact for which MDA is responsible. This helps in reminding
us about not only the purpose of the existence of the MDA but also
the rationale for undertaking the RFD exercise. The whole point of
RFD is to ensure that the department/ministry serves the purpose
for which they were created in the first place.
A mechanism needs to be established to assess the broad outcomes
and the impact of the programs, projects or initiatives of the MDA.
It should capture and closely map with the mandate of the MDA.
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 17
Evaluation Mechanism
Evaluation is defined as the systematic collection and objective
analysis of evidence on public policies, programs, projects,
functions and organizations to assess issues such as relevance,
performance (effectiveness and efficiency), return of investment
(RoI), impact and sustainability. Evaluation essentially involves
comparing achievement against a target.
The Government stakeholders should agree on the target (specific
to the MDA), against which the quality of the RF will be judged.
Here, it should also be considered as to how closely the RF
guidelines were followed at the time of the formulation of the
institute specific RFD.
The identified Evaluation Mechanism should be institutionalized
across the Government. The participating MDAs should own up the responsibility to incorporate the evaluation
mechanism as part of their management function including:
adequate allocation of budget towards implementation and adoption of RFD
identification of dedicated resources
implementation of appropriate measures based on the outcomes of the evaluation
Some of the key guiding principles, which can be considered for the evaluation, are as follows:
Evaluation should be development-oriented and should address key development priorities of the
Government and the citizens
Evaluation should be undertaken ethically and with integrity
Evaluation should be utilization-oriented
Evaluation methods should be comprehensive
Evaluation should advance and promote the Government’s transparency and accountability agenda
Evaluation should be undertaken in a way which is inclusive and participatory
Evaluation must promote learning for all the participating stakeholders
Core Values
Targets and Performance Indicators
Assess Past Performance
Delivery Commitments
Outcome and Impact
Evaluation Mechanism
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 18
Benefits of Results
Framework
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 19
Benefits of Results Framework
The RF provides for a well-defined framework to monitor and measure progress as well as the intended
outcomes for the program. A well-constructed RFD facilitates effective monitoring, management, and
evaluation of various Government programs. It provides meaningful information to ascertain the success ratio
of the adopted programs and policies of the institute, which in a way also reflects the success achieved by the
institute in terms of fulfilling the Government mandate.
The RFD also provides a mechanism for any institute to achieve the following:
Create focus on specific expected outcomes
Establish an evidence-based approach to monitoring and evaluation
Provide effective tool to assess program implementation with respect to progress in achieving results at the
outputs, outcomes and impact levels
Achieve strategic objectives, which is the ultimate driver for any program
Provide a systematic approach for decision makers to plan their strategies and to select interventions that
are most likely to address targeted problems
Guide corrective actions to activities, reallocating resources and reevaluating targeted objectives
Clearly identify how progress toward the targeted objective(s) will be measured
Clarify definitions and standards for performance information
Promote accountability and transparency with timely, accessible and accurate performance
Assess what approaches or interventions contribute most effectively to achieving specific development
objectives, a process that helps identify good practices for replication.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 20
Key Challenges
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 21
Key Challenges
Successful execution of the RFD requires greater engagement and ownership among stakeholders
Involvement of multiple MDAs for various services adds to complexity in performance assessment
Process, documentation, maturity level may differ among MDAs and lack of a larger view of standardization
across country
Insecurity and apprehensions about outcome may lead to providing inaccurate data for showing better
results
Reluctance to performance evaluation of people may lead to ineffective outcome
Ensuring adherence to timelines by various institutions is a must for meaningful outcome of the exercise
and to have larger view at country level
It is important to have a buy-in of the process among the users and to communicate the importance of the
exercise
Effects of interventions can be difficult to measure fully as the set of indicators carries the risk of not fully
capturing achievements and progress and of missing unintended consequences
Results frameworks can become overly complicated and therefore importance, relevance, cost, timeliness
and utility are key considerations for determining which set of indicators should be included.
Involving program staff in the evaluation process could bias results measurement, since implementers are
motivated to collect data that reflect positively on an intervention and its results
As part of the addressing these challenges, the following action points may be considered by the key
stakeholders responsible for the implementation and adoption of RF within the GoA:
Establish an institutional structure for the RF development, implementation and monitoring. An indicative
structure has been discussed in the next section titled ‘Managing the RF Process’. It needs to be assessed
further in terms of the capacity and preparedness of the existing agencies within the GoA for the role of the
Nodal Agency (NA) for the RF initiative. ADISA under the supervision of MIPA can be one of the options
which can be considered by the Government
Setup regular and periodic review meetings involving all the key stakeholders and participating MDAs at
the highest level of Government possible to ensure commitment and ownership at the MDA level. These
reviews can be undertaken by an independent agency to avoid any conflict at the MDA level. For example,
Delivery Unit (DU) can be one of the options to play the role of the independent reviewer for RF
implementation who will consolidate periodic findings on the RF initiative and submit to the Nodal Agency
for necessary action
Undertake change management initiatives to address any concerns around the RF
Undertake stakeholder consultation workshops to inculcate a sense of ownership amongst the MDAs with
senior leadership participation from Government to communicate the seriousness and commitment to the
cause of RF adoption
Define easy to understand and clear measurable as part of the RF and map them at the initiative level as
well
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 22
Undertake training sessions and if necessary, capacity building programs to support and handhold the
participating MDAs at least during the first year of the RF implementation. In the context of Albania, this
responsibility can be undertaken by ADISA
Develop, implement and upgrade infrastructure to support the RF implementation
Understanding these challenges and the underlying mitigation measures is even more important in the context
of Albania since a concept like RF will be implemented for the first time and there are bound to some teething
issues initially. However, with proper planning and preparation, and team work amongst key agencies of GoA
such as MIPA, ADISA, NAIS, DU, etc., the implementation of RF can be done with considerable success.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 23
Managing the RF
Process
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 24
Managing the RF Process
Results Framework should be integrated within existing management processes and systems. Key points to be
kept in perspective to ensure this include:
Proper and adequate documentation focusing on the following:
o Integration of RF within existing management processes and systems
o Definitions and technical standards of all the information to be collected by the institution
o Processes for identifying, collecting, collating, verifying and storing information
o Use of information in managing for results
o Publication of performance information
Adequate capacity to manage this activity
Appropriate systems to collect, collate, verify and store the information
Consultation processes that ensure the information needs of different users are taken into consideration
when specifying the range of information to be collected
Processes to ensure the information is appropriately used for planning, budgeting and management
Ensure that responsibility for managing performance information to individual’s role
Identified set of performance indicators for reporting for oversight purposes
Providing public access to Government-held information
o Wide range of information collected by Government can help decision-making in the private sector,
civil society and the general public if placed in the public domain
Just like other countries, even in the context of Albania, to ensure successful adoption of the RF within the
government framework, it is extremely important that this entire agenda is driven from the top leadership of
the government to ensure proper and timely implementation. Here, it is important to understand the different
roles involved for managing and implementing the RF which has been described in the following table.
S. No.
Role Responsibility Remarks
1 Key Sponsor
A prime stakeholder or an entity who is really interested and has important stakes in getting the RF implemented since it will benefit this entity and the associated eco-system. This role is typically played by the highest level Government leadership to ensure that the RF is taken seriously and is implemented in all its earnestness by the various government MDAs.
The key responsibility includes regular review, reinforcing the importance of RF to all the stakeholders,
Provide support for resolution of all the challenges, issues and difficulties
In the case of Albania, the role of the Key Sponsor could be played an entity at the top level of the Government such as the Office of the Prime Minister or Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 25
S. No.
Role Responsibility Remarks
Provide guidance and supervise the overall RF implementation
2 Nodal Agency (NO)
Refers to the agency or the entity responsible for managing the day to day operations from the perspective of implementing the RF in a country. This agency should ideally have some exposure and understanding on the monitoring aspects of the government systems and functions. The key responsibilities of the NO include:
Develop and prepare the policy and guidelines for the implementation of the RF
Finalize the RF template
Help and supervise the design and development of the online system for RF
Conduct the change management and capacity building activities
Undertake stakeholder consultations for finalization of the RF framework and the underlying template to be followed
Function as the custodian of the data and documents to be received from the participating MDAs
Setup a help desk and provide handholding support to the participating MDAs with the development of their respective RFD
In case of Albania, the role of the NO can be played by an agency who ideally is also the owner of the forthcoming Long Term Policy Document such as ADISA.
3 Implementing Agency (IA)
Refers to the agency which will be responsible for the implementation of the online system for managing the RF program including online forms, etc.
In case of Albania, this role could be played by NAIS (or AKSHI) given the scope of the activity for design and development of the system.
4 Participating MDA
Refers to the Government entities including Ministries, Departments and Agencies who will participate and develop their respective RFD. The key responsibility of the MDA will include:
Develop, define and finalize the MDA specific RFD
Establish internal institutional mechanism to support the development and implementation of the RFD
Regularly update the RFD
Provide timely and accurate response on the letters
It is important to establish an internal framework and institutional mechanism as to which units or individuals will be responsible for the development, adoption and update of the RFD for the respective MDA.
5 Working Group
Refers to the cross ministerial or agency entity which has adequate representation from different MDAs. The key responsibility of the Working Group will be to build consensus on the RFD template since a common template needs to be adopted across all the MDAs.
In the context of Albania, one or a combination of more than one working groups from the existing set can be considered for this role
The above tabular structure is indicative in nature and may undergo change at the time of the RF finalization
and adoption by the Government.
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 26
Way Forward
Development of a Long-term Policy Document on provision of citizen-centric administrative services by central state institutions | Principles of Result Framework
PwC 27
Way Forward
This document has described the concept behind the RF and along with the key principles, components,
benefits, challenges and the RF management process. As explained in the initial section of this document, the
intent of this document was only to provide a high level view of RF and the underlying principles. Going
forward, once the Long Term Policy Document has been finalized and adopted by the GoA and its MDAs, this
document can be used as a reference for the purposes of preparing and detailing out the RFD for each MDA at
an individual level.