Programme Management Structure Summary Table 19 provides a summary of the required theoretical programme management principles as identified in Section 3.2.3, and compares these requirements which what was in place both before the restructure of 2010, and currently (Post-Restructure). 19: Programme Management Structure Summary Theoretical Programme Management Requirements Applied to MIG Programme? Pre-Restructure Post-Restructure Component Aspects in 2009/2010 in 2009/2010 Programme Policy and Charter Yes; in MIG Policy Framework on 05 February 2004. No; the policy from 2004 was assumed to be applicable. Yes; in terms of phasing out existing grants and Implementation Plan No; it was business as usual. introducing MIG. Programme Yes; was covered by management committee Planning Periodic Revisions to Plan on Changes No. structure but not formally documented. Review of existing policies and procedures in Yes; was covered by management committee No. organisation to ensure no conflicts structure but not formally documented. Governance structure, including steering Yes; a national committee structure was defined to No; management committee structure fell away. committee and programme management team include all stakeholders for decision making. No. National management unit was split between Yes; capacity provided at national and municipal level at CoGTA. Capacity not built in all Sector Programme Organisational Structure but capacity not built in all Sector Departments and Departments and Provinces. Municipal capacity Provinces. continued through PMUs. No; continued with previous process and procedures, Programme Processes and Procedures Yes; but not updated. despite restructuring. Programme No; national management unit was split between Centralised Programme Management Team Yes; national MIG Management Unit. Governance in CoGTA. and No; too much ambiguity in roles and responsibilities, e.g. Clearly defined roles, responsibilities and Organisation Yes; but roles and responsibilities became blurred. monthly site report. Programme authority split between authority 3-Branches at CoGTA. Personnel not dedicated to MIG. Yes; metrics defined at programme (elimination of Yes; metrics defined at programme (elimination of service delivery backlogs) together with a proposal to Metrics to Measure Health and Process of the service delivery backlogs) but not gathered. Other gather them that was not implemented. Other metrics Programme metrics focussed on project health to be gathered through focussed on project health to be gathered through MIG MIS. MIG MIS. Yes; but MIS not adequately maintained, updated or Information Management Systems Continued with out-of-date MIS. enhanced.
Programme Management Structure Summary Table 19 provides a summary of the required theoretical programme management principles as identified in Section 3.2.3, and compares these requirements which what was in place both before the restructure of 2010, and currently (Post-Restructure). 19: Programme Management Structure Summary Theoretical Programme Management Requirements Applied to MIG Programme? Component Aspects Pre-Restructure in 2009/2010 Post-Restructure in 2009/2010 Programme Planning Programme Policy and Charter Yes; in MIG Policy Framework on 05 February 2004. No; the policy from 2004 was assumed to be applicable. Implementation Plan Yes; in terms of phasing out existing grants and introducing MIG. No; it was business as usual. Periodic Revisions to Plan on Changes Yes; was covered by management committee structure but not formally documented. No. Review of existing policies and procedures in organisation to ensure no conflicts Yes; was covered by management committee structure but not formally documented. No. Programme Governance and Organisation Governance structure, including steering committee and programme management team Yes; a national committee structure was defined to include all stakeholders for decision making. No; management committee structure fell away. Programme Organisational Structure Yes; capacity provided at national and municipal level but capacity not built in all Sector Departments and Provinces. No. National management unit was split between at CoGTA. Capacity not built in all Sector Departments and Provinces. Municipal capacity continued through PMUs. Programme Processes and Procedures Yes; but not updated. No; continued with previous process and procedures, despite restructuring. Centralised Programme Management Team Yes; national MIG Management Unit. No; national management unit was split between in CoGTA. Clearly defined roles, responsibilities and authority Yes; but roles and responsibilities became blurred. No; too much ambiguity in roles and responsibilities, e.g. monthly site report. Programme authority split between 3-Branches at CoGTA. Personnel not dedicated to MIG. Metrics to Measure Health and Process of the Programme Yes; metrics defined at programme (elimination of service delivery backlogs) together with a proposal to gather them that was not implemented. Other metrics focussed on project health to be gathered through MIG MIS. Yes; metrics defined at programme (elimination of service delivery backlogs) but not gathered. Other metrics focussed on project health to be gathered through MIG MIS. Information Management Systems Yes; but MIS not adequately maintained, updated or enhanced. Continued with out-of-date MIS.
MIG-Report_version-5-Final.docx