Note

On the Implementation of the Performance Management Framework (PMF) at the Level of the County Departments for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (DPC) and of the Departments of Social Assistance (DAS)

The implementation of a Performance Management Framework (PMF) was achieved through the DFID (UK Department for International Development) Programme of Technical Assistance. In October 2003 the Pilot Project on the implementation of PMF ended, which took place during 6 months in 7 counties and 1 sector of Bucharest, and the implementation at the level of the National Authority for Child Protection and Adoption (NACPA) started. On the 16th of February 2004, PMF was launched at a national level for all DPCs and DASs in Romania. During the period March-May six regional training sessions were organized, in order to support the DPCs with the implementation of PMF, after which each Department began the implementation of PMF.

In August 2004, the DPCs and DASs filled out and sent to the NACPA the review questionnaire which enabled the analysis of the outcomes of the implementation of PMF.

Out of the 41 counties, PMF was implemented in 39 counties, with the exception of Buzau and Dâmbovita, where it will be implemented starting with 1.09. 2004, and it was also implemented in the 6 sectors of the municipality of Bucharest.

1,574 staff members of the specialized public services for child protection at county level have been involved in the process. 206 Team Performance Plans (TPPs) have been elaborated, and 1,501 Individual Performance Plans (IPPs), out of which 939 IPPs also include completed Review Forms and Development Plans.

Following the analysis of the questionnaires, the following main benefits have been identified by the DPCs in implementing PMF:

• Awareness and clarification of the objectives of the DPCs, of the services and offices of the DPCs
• Better organization of the activities
• Awareness regarding individual attributions
• Establishing the responsibilities and the role of each staff member both at the level of the team and individually
• Identifying strengths and weaknesses
• Identifying the gaps between the plans and the achievements and operational intervention to re-establish priorities
• Improved communication and cooperation between the team (service) members
• Improved communication and cooperation between the team (service) members and the team leader
• Improved communication and cooperation between teams
• Establishing concrete criteria for performance review
• Clear identification of each team member's training and personal development needs
• Increased quality of services for beneficiaries
• Staff's positive attitude to change
• Increased staff commitment and accountability in fulfilling tasks
• Shorter timeframes for solving cases
• Valorizing positive experience and best practice models
• Better information flows both horizontally and vertically
• Improved objective monitoring and assessment
• Organizational, decision making and executive transparency

The following difficulties have been identified in implementing PMF at the level of the specialized public services for child protection (DPC):

• High workload and additional effort on behalf of the involved persons
• Some staff members' reluctance to change
• Lack of financial incentives for the staff
• Radical novelties and changes: work methods, management, strategies
• Insufficient human resources
• Staff fluctuation
• Difficulties in understanding the final purpose of this action
• Unexpected situations hindering planning
• Staff's fear to take more responsibilities
• Formulating objectives
• Additional time to fill out the forms
• Replacing one way of working with another one, more elaborate and structured, in a relatively short time
• Difficulties in correctly elaborating TPPs and IPPs
• Novelty of the terminology in the forms
• Achieving external partnerships
• Sectoral interventions
• Changes within the organization
• Establishing performance indicators

All the DPCs have overcome the difficulties by using the following common methods:

• Meetings on the implementation of PMF
• Repeated meetings with the chiefs of service and the other involved persons
• Team and individual discussions
• Perseverance, consistency, extending the work programme
• Permanent feedback
• Using the information in the operation manual
• Interim reviews
• Team work
• Establishing joint work rules
• Direct approach, individually and within the team, of conflict situations
• Making the staff aware of the importance, necessity and advantages of PMF
• Cooperation and ongoing training

At present, PMF can be implemented at the level of the entire Department in 28 counties and sectors. The 19 counties and sectors which cannot implement PMF have mentioned the causes which do not enable the implementation, as well as the additional support needed.

The causes mentioned by all the DPCs are the following:

• Legislative changes and the reorganization
• High workload
• Insufficient human, material and financial resources
• Lack of specialists
• The strategy on child protection is not approved by the County Councils due to the reorganization of the child protection system

With regard to the additional support needed, the following aspects have been mentioned:

• Training of the staff of the entire DPC by NACPA specialists
• The evaluation of the staff should be done according to a normative act elaborated by NACPA, at present the evaluation is regulated by normative acts which are not specific to the child protection field
• Training sessions for the management staff, in order to improve their communication skills and their skills of organizing the activity as part of various timeframes (strategic management, conflict management);
• Circulating TPPs and IPPs from DPCs where the system is working
• Organizing workshops in order to consolidate and improve work techniques/methods
• Designating a model DPC which could be contacted by the DPCs with less experience in implementing PMF and which encounter difficulties

The implementation of PMF has enabled the DPCs to identify the training needs which can be satisfied locally. They are the following:

• Knowledge of the legislation and implementing it
• Trends in the child protection system
• Case management, partnership management
• Counseling for the child and the family
• IT operation
• Specialization courses for the newly employed social workers
• Training courses for the staff working with institutionalized children
• Courses for foster parents

Training needs which can be met by a third party have also been identified:

• Management of public services, case management, partnership management, project management, management of financial resources, management of human resources
• Implementation of the new legislative package
• Methods of working with victims of domestic violence
• Assessment methods and techniques of working with children with disabilities
• Post-graduate training in administrative management
• Performance review
• Counseling for the child and the family
• Training of chiefs of service, of chiefs of placement centres and of educators

These courses will be provided by NACPA, INA (National Institute of Administration), Universities, DFID, CRIPS and other NGOs.

By implementing PMF, the DPCs have identified the academic, professional, and skills related training needs, for which at present there is no provider:

• Leadership courses
• Post-graduate courses
• Psychological counseling and evaluation
• Performance review
• Team supervision
• IT operation

The implementation of PMF has led to changes in the leadership and management practices at the level of directors and chiefs of service, of team leaders and their teams, and last but not least at individual level:

• Transparency, consultation, assertiveness, receptivity, accountability
• Improved communication
• Delegation of responsibilities
• More efficient activity and regular monitoring of activity
• Leaders' increased involvement in the activity
• Stimulating and supporting staff
• Increased team cohesion
• Avoiding conflict situations
• Increased accountability in achieving the indicators
• More efficient approach of unexpected events
• Selecting and managing priorities, clear tasks and timeframes for their achievement
• Self-awareness and awareness of the development needs for various fields of activity
• Better structured daily programme
• Positive feedback between assessment and self-assessment;
• Coherent vision of the child protection system

Following the implementation of PMF, the following positive outcomes for children and their families have been signaled:

• Increased quality of services provided for beneficiaries
• Diversification of services provided for children and their families
• Improved management of the time allocated for the intervention at the level of beneficiaries
• Changing beneficiaries into partners
• Making beneficiaries accountable/ involved in overcoming crisis situations
• Facilitating access to services
• Increased number of children protected in the family type protection system
• Reducing the number of institutionalized children
• Increased number of children benefiting from counseling and support services
• Increased possibility of identifying the priority intervention areas

Following the implementation of PMF at the level of all the DPCs in the country, several observations can be made:

• Increased quality of the activity
• Outcomes for children and their families have been positive, however not always at the level of the expectations, especially because of the socio-economic situation, but also due to the low education level of the families at risk
• The acquired experience, as well as the quality standards enshrined in law, have highlighted the need to review the county strategies in the field of child protection and the deinstitutionalization plans

Alexandra Georgescu - October 2004