80 likes | 191 Vues
This document outlines evaluation methods in Turkish public administration, focusing on organizational and individual performance management. It discusses the legislative framework, highlighting key laws such as the Public Financial Management and Control Law (No: 5018) and the Civil Servants Law (No: 657). It also includes evaluation practices, such as activity reports from various government institutions and individual performance assessments. Despite the establishment of a legal framework, the document notes shortcomings in the implementation of objective evaluation criteria and the absence of necessary guides and manuals.
E N D
02.10. 2011 DECISION MAKING AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC FINANCEORGANIZATION AND PROCESS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 5th WEEK TEAM WORK 1
Evaluation Methods in Turkish Administrations • Legislation Base - Evaluation Methods at Institutional Level - Evaluation Methods at Individual Level • Evaluation Practice • Conculuding Remarks
Legislation BaseEvaluation Methods at Institutional Level • Public Financial Management and Control Law (No:5018) • Institutional Activity Report (All Public Administrations) • General Activity Report (Ministry of Finance) • Local Governments’ Activity Report (Ministry of Inferior) • General Evaluation Report (Turkish Court of Accounts) • Audit Reports
Legislation BaseEvaluation Methods at Individual Level • Civil Servants’ Law (No:657): • Registry Reports • Prize
Evaluation Practice • Evaluation of Public Investments -Expenditures of Investments are monitored in 3-month periods - Annual Investment Reports are evaluated at the end of the year and that constitute a data-base for the appropriation of next period.
Evaluation Practice • Rank improvement of civil servants according to registry report scores • Prize and Latter of Appreciation • Encouraging Bonus
Concluding Remarks • Legal base of performance evaluation in public administrations has been formed with in the Law No: 5018 and secondary regulation has been enacted to improve application aspect of 5018, however implication aspects is not satisfactory and sufficient yet. • In evaluation process, documents like guides and manuels have not been prepared yet so there is no objective performance evaluation criteria determined for the public agencies