社會救助績效評價存在的問題其次課件

TheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy:ChallengeandReflectionProf.YueJingLunSchoolOfGovernment,SunYat-SenUniversityDisclaimer:Theviewsexpressedinthisdocumentarethoseoftheauthor,anddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsandpoliciesoftheAsianDevelopmentBank(ADB),itsBoardofDirectors,orthegovernmentstheyrepresent.ADBdoesnotguaranteetheaccuracyofthedataincludedinthisdocument,andacceptnoresponsibilityforanyconsequenceoftheiruse.Bymakinganydesignationorreferencetoaparticularterritoryorgeographicalarea,orbyusingtheterm“country”inthisdocument,ADBdoesnotintendtomakeanyjudgmentsastothelegalorotherstatusofanyterritoryorarea.

TheperformanceevaluationofOutline

Ⅰ.KeyPointsofTheEvaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyⅢ.ExistingProblemsⅣ.SuggestionsOutlineⅠ.KeyPointsofThe

Ⅰ.KeyPointsofTheEvaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy

RegionalPracticeStarting

from

2007,theperformance

assessmentofUrbanandRural

MinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystemwas

being

carriedout

allover

the

country.Shandong,Anhui,Yunnan,Guangxi,Hainan,Jiangsu,Jilin,Hebei,liaoningandotherprovinceshaveexploredtoevaluatetheperformanceofMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystem.DifferentprovincesestablishedtheirownEvaluationIndicatorSystem.CentralGovernmentPolicythepromulgationof“MethodsofPerformance

AssessmentofMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystem”byMinistryofCivilAffairsandMinistryofFinance.((2014),No.21)thepromulgationof“IndicatorsandcriteriaforPerformance

AssessmentofMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystemforautonomousregionsandmunicipalitiesdirectlyunderthecentralgovernment”byMinistryofCivilAffairsandMinistryofFinance.((2015),No.316)

Ⅰ.KeyPointsofTheEvaluatiⅠ.TheKeyPointsofTheEvaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy

Whoevaluate?Localgovernmentdepartmentsofcivilaffairsandfinance,qualifiedinstitutions,andsocialorganizationscanbeentrustedtocarryouttheevaluation.evaluatewhat?Institutionalandresourcessupport(Organization,financialsupport,CapacityBuilding,informationsharing,checkingmechanism).management（Standardsetting,targeting,fundmanagement,supervisionandinspection）.Effectiveness（accuracyoftargeting、accuracyofsubsidy、awarenessofpolicy、clientsatisfaction）.Ⅰ.TheKeyPointsofTheEvaluaⅠ.TheKeyPointsofTheEvaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy

Howtoevaluate?TheperformanceofMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystemwasevaluatedbyascoringmethod(0-100).fourgrades(excellent,good,qualifiedandunqualified)aredistinguishedaccordingtothescores.Theevaluationwasmadeinfoursteps:Self-evaluation,On-the-spotInvestigation,ComprehensiveEvaluation,Publicnotice.TheuseofevaluationresultsTheevaluationresultscanbeusedtoguidelocalgovernmenttoimprovetheirwork.Itprovidesimportantinformationfortheallocationofcentralfiscalsubsidiestolocalsocialassistanceprograms.Ⅰ.TheKeyPointsofTheEvaluaⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyManyscholarsinChinahavedoneresearchregardingtheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy,andtheyhaveputforwarddifferentevaluationmethods.Localgovernmentshavealsoadopteddifferentevaluationpractices.6Ⅱ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyFirstly,somescholarsevaluatedtheperformanceofChinaSocialAssistancePolicybyadoptingquantitativeresearchmethods.ZhangxiulanandXuyuebindidahouseholdsurveyof4,500ruralhouseholdinJiangxi,Hubeiprovinces,etc.theyemployedthequantitativeresearchmethodtoevaluatetheperformanceofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyforthefirsttime.Theyputforwardanargumentthat“Ruralsocialassistancepolicyreducethepovertyrateby10%”.HongdayongconductedquantitativecomparisontoassesstheperformanceofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyaccordingtothefivepolicyobjectivesasfollows,socialregulation,theenhancementofself-help,SocialCare,socialintegration,andSocialJustice.7Ⅱ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyFanYouqingandGuXin(2007)adoptedthehorizontalequityasanappraisalstandard,andmadeuseofstatisticalyearbooksintheyear2003-2005toappraisethefinancingperformanceoftheurbanandruralsocialsafetynetprogram.Theypointedoutthat,inordertoletpeoplealloverthecountryenjoyequalsocialprotectionfromthesocialsafetynet,ruralMinimumLivingStandardSecuritySystemshouldbepromoted.Thecentralgovernmentshouldshouldermorefinancialresponsibility.Wangzengwen(2009)introducedeffectivenesscoefficientofMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteesystemandtheliferescuecoefficienttotheperformanceevaluationofChinaRuralSocialAssistancePolicy.8Ⅱ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicySecondly,localgovernmentsintroducethethirdpartiestoassesstheeffectofsocialassistancepolicy.Since2009,thethirdpartywasintroducedbylocaldepartmentsofcivilaffairsinsomedevelopedprovinces,suchasShanghaiandJiangsu,toevaluatetheperformanceofelderlyservice,communityservice,socialworkservice,etc.In2013,theCivilAffairsBureauofChongqingCityentrustaprofessionalAccountingFirmtoevaluatetheperformanceoftheexpenditureofTheMinimumLivingGuaranteeFund.FromSeptembertoearlyOctober,2014,HorizonResearchConsultancyGrouporganizedasurveyof‘theperformanceoftheMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystem’inmunicipalities,provincialcapitalcitiesalloverthecountryandXinjiangShihezi.Thesurveysamplesizewas20,754.9Ⅱ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaⅡ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyIn2015,DepartmentofSocialWorkoftheMinistryofCivilAffairsentrusttheShanghaiOrientalCenterofSocialOrganizationsandServiceEvaluationtoassesstheperformanceof‘theDemonstrationProjectofSocialWorkServicesfortheelderlywithspecialdifficulties’thatwassupportedbythewelfarelottery.Government’spurchasingserviceswasintroducedbyXuzhoucityforthefirsttimeinJiangsuprovince.professionalaccountingcompanieswereentrustedtoevaluatetheurbanandruralMinimumLivingStandardGuaranteeSystems,theassistancetowardthedisabledwithspecialdifficulties,andthefinancialconditionsofmedicalassistance.10Ⅱ.EvaluationPracticeofChinaⅢ.ExistingProblemsoftheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyFirstly,theevaluationoftheimplementationoftheSocialAssistancePolicyisinadequateandneedmoreattention.TheevaluationofSocialAssistancePolicywastoobiasedontheusageoffinancialresources,projectdesign,organizationandmanagement,andreviewingandgrading.theevaluationofthepolicyimplementationprocessandtheimplementationresultsarerelativelyignored.11Ⅲ.ExistingProblemsofthepeⅢ.ExistingProblemsoftheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicySecondly,theexistingindicatorsystemoftheperformanceofSocialAssistancePolicyisproblematic:thecoverageoftheassessmentindexsystemisincomplete,someindicatorsarenotappropriate,andsomeindicatorsaredifficulttobemeasuredinreality,etc.12Ⅲ.ExistingProblemsofthepeⅢ.ExistingProblemsoftheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyThirdly,“EvaluationbytheThirdParty”modeisnotfullypromotedandpopularizedinalloverthecountryandalotofevaluationworkwasdonebyrelevantgovernmentdepartmentsdirectly.Theemotionalfactorsthenmaybeinvolvedandaffecttheobjectivityandaccuracyoftheassessmentresults.13Ⅲ.ExistingProblemsofthepeⅢ.theExistingProblemsoftheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicyFinally,CentralgovernmentisdifficulttoimplementasetofindicatorsystemandauniversalstandardfortheperformanceevaluationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy,becauselocalgovernmentsalloverthecountryhavetheirownstandardandspecificstipulationsofoperationmanagement.Somelocalgovernmentsstilldidnotestablishareasonableandeffectiveperformanceappraisalandassessmentmechanism.14Ⅲ.theExistingProblemsoftheⅣ.SuggestionsFirst,itisnecessarytostrengthenthesupervisionandevaluationoftheimplementationofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy.Inthepast,theevaluationofSocialAssistancePolicywastoobiasedontheusageofmoney,projectdesign,organizationmanagement,reviewingandgrading.Theevaluationofthepolicyimplementationprocessandtheimplementationresultshavebeenrelativelyignored.15Ⅳ.SuggestionsFirst,itisnecⅣ.SuggestionsSecondly,weneedtospeedupestablishingandimprovingamechanismofemployingthirdPartiestoevaluatetheperformanceofChinaSocialAssistancePolicy.Evaluationfromthethirdpartyisanecessarymeasureforscientificallyevaluatinggovernmentwork,improvingdemocratizationandscientificdecision-making,promotingtheimplementationofrelatedpolicies,expandingthesocialparticipation,promotingtheinnovationofgovernance.Evaluationfromthethirdpartycanavoidthebiasofadministrativedepartmentsthatmyaffecttheobjectivityandeffectivenessofperformanceevaluation.Evaluationfromthethirdpartycaneffectivelymakeuptheshortageoflaboringovernmentdepartments,reducetheirworkloadandimprovetheworkingefficiencyoftherelevantdepartments.16Ⅳ.SuggestionsSecondly,wenⅣ.SuggestionsThirdly,localgovernmentsshouldinviterelevantexpertsandscholarstohelpthemestablishareasonableandeffectiveperformanceevaluationandindicatorsystem.17Ⅳ.SuggestionsThirdly,localgⅣ.SuggestionsAgoodperformanceevaluationsystemofsocialassistanceshouldincludeatleastthefollowingtwoevaluationcriteria:18TheattainmentofpolicyobjectiveTheefficiencyofoperationⅣ.SuggestionsAgoodperformanEvaluationcriteriaPolicyobjectiveAlleviationofpovertyIncomemaintenanceandreplacementPromotingsocialcohesionProtectionagainstrisk19EvaluationcriteriaPolicyobjTheefficiencyofoperationTargetEfficiencyMismatchintargetpopulationsFraudandabuseMal-administrationMeasurementerror20Theefficiencyofoperation20Theefficiencyofoperation

EconomicEfficiencyShapingeconomicstructuresAlteringincentivesTheunemploymenttrapThepovertytrapThesavingstrapBehaviouralresponsesBenefitdependencyanddurationReservationwagesWork-rich,work-poorfamiliesUncertaintyandriskPolicyresponsesDirectingbehaviourStructuralreform21Theefficiencyofoperation21TheefficiencyofoperationAdministrativeEfficiencyIntermediateoutcomesDeliveryandvolumeSpeedofserviceAccuracyandadequacyUserefficiencyAccessQualityoftreatmentSecurityManagementofresourcesPersonnelInformationtechnologyPerformancemanagementInternalauditExternalaudit22Theefficiencyofoperation2223Thanks!23Thanks!中國社會救助政策績效評估：挑戰(zhàn)與反思岳經(jīng)綸教授中山大學政治與公共事務(wù)管理學院24中國社會救助政策績效評估：挑戰(zhàn)與反思岳經(jīng)綸教授24內(nèi)容提要一、我國社會救助評估的政策要點二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐三、存在的問題四、改善建議25內(nèi)容提要一、我國社會救助評估的政策要點25一、社會救助評估政策的要點地方實踐：從2007年開始，我國各地陸續(xù)開展了城鄉(xiāng)低?？冃Э己斯ぷ?，例如廣西、山東、安徽、云南、海南、江蘇、吉林、河北、遼寧等省份已經(jīng)進行了低?？冃гu價方面的探索，并建立了本省的評價指標體系。各地績效評價工作形式多樣，方法各異，從不同方面較好地推進了相關(guān)工作。中央政策：民政部、財政部關(guān)于印發(fā)《最低生活保障工作績效評價辦法》的通知（民發(fā)〔2014〕21號）民政部辦公廳、財政部辦公廳關(guān)于印發(fā)《2015年度各?。ㄗ灾螀^(qū)、直轄市）最低生活保障工作績效評價指標和評價標準》的通知（民辦函〔2015〕316號）26一、社會救助評估政策的要點地方實踐：26社會救助評估政策的要點評估主體(who)根據(jù)需要，可委托地方民政、財政部門和具備資質(zhì)的事業(yè)單位、社會組織、中介機構(gòu)等第三方組織具體實施。評估內(nèi)容(what)工作保障（組織保障、資金保障、能力建設(shè)、信息化建設(shè)、核對機制）工作管理（標準制定、對象管理、資金執(zhí)行、監(jiān)督檢查）工作效果（對象準確率、補助準確率、政策知曉率、社會滿意率）27社會救助評估政策的要點評估主體(who)27社會救助評估政策的要點評估方法(how)低保工作績效評價采用評分法，滿分為100分。評價結(jié)果分為優(yōu)秀、良好、合格、不合格四個等級。低保工作績效評價采取以下步驟：自我評價，實地核查，綜合評價，通報。評估結(jié)果的使用低保工作績效評價結(jié)果，作為督促指導地方改進低保工作、通過“以獎代補”分配中央財政城鄉(xiāng)低保補助資金的重要依據(jù)。28社會救助評估政策的要點評估方法(how)28二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐對于如何開展和進行社會救助政策的績效考核和評估，我國也有不少學者做了相關(guān)的研究，并提出了不同的社會救助政策績效評估體系和方法。地方也有各類評估實踐。29二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐對于如何開展和進行社會救助政策二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐首先，有學者通過定量研究方法，對社會救助政策績效進行評估。張秀蘭，徐月賓（2007）等對江西和湖北等地的4500多戶農(nóng)村住戶進行調(diào)查后，第一次將定量分析的方法引入到社會救助的績效研究中，并提出了“農(nóng)村的社會救助政策有著降低10%的貧困率的減貧效果”等相關(guān)結(jié)論。洪大用（2007）根據(jù)社會規(guī)制、助人自助、社會照顧、社會融合和社會公正等五個方面的政策目標，對我國的城鄉(xiāng)社會救助的績效評估做了量化對比分析。30二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐首先，有學者通過定量研究方法，二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐范酉慶、顧昕等（2007）以橫向公平性為標準，以2003-2005年民政部及各省統(tǒng)計年鑒數(shù)據(jù)為經(jīng)驗材料，對我國城鄉(xiāng)社會安全網(wǎng)項目籌資水平的績效做出了相應(yīng)的評估。他們指出，為了讓各地民眾得到大體平等的社會安全網(wǎng)保護，推動農(nóng)村最低生活保障制度發(fā)展是可行的途徑，而中央政府承擔一定的籌資責任可有效推動農(nóng)村社會救助體系走向橫向公平的結(jié)論。王增文（2009）把低保救助力度系數(shù)和生活救助系數(shù)引入到農(nóng)村社會救助的減貧效果的定量研究中。31二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐31二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐其次，地方政府運用第三方機構(gòu)對社會救助政策的執(zhí)行效果進行評估。2009年以來，上海、江蘇等發(fā)達省份的一些基層民政部門已開始引入第三方組織，對養(yǎng)老服務(wù)、社區(qū)服務(wù)、社會工作服務(wù)等效果進行評估。例如在2013年，重慶市民政局委托專業(yè)會計師事務(wù)所對低保資金支出項目進行了績效評價。零點公司于2014年9月至10月上旬在各直轄市、省會城市和新疆兵團的石河子市，采取問卷調(diào)查，街頭訪問等方式，組織開展了“2014年最低生活保障工作績效調(diào)查”，共調(diào)查樣本20754份。32二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐其次，地方政府運用第三方機構(gòu)對二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐在2015年，民政部社會工作司委托上海東方社會組織與服務(wù)評估中心，對部本級福利彩票公益金支持的“特殊困難老年人社會工作服務(wù)示范項目”開展績效評估。而徐州市也率先在全省推出政府購買服務(wù)的方式，引入具有專業(yè)資質(zhì)的會（審）計師事務(wù)所作為第三方，對全市主城區(qū)城鄉(xiāng)低保、特殊困難殘疾人救助、醫(yī)療救助的資金情況進行評估。33二、我國社會救助政策的評估實踐33三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題首先，總體來說對于社會救助政策實施情況本身的評估少，重視不足。社會救助政策評估往往過于偏向?qū)ι鐣戎馁Y金使用、項目建設(shè)、組織管理乃至示范評選等方面的評估，而卻忽視了政策實施過程和執(zhí)行效果的評估。34三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題首先，總體來說對于社會救助政策三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題其次，在已有的社會救助績效評估指標體系構(gòu)建中存在以下問題：考核指標體系涵蓋范圍不全面、指標的選取不夠恰當，以及部分考核指標的信息獲取困難，等。35三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題其次，在已有的社會救助績效評估三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題第三，“第三方評估”模式仍未全面地在各地推廣和普及，很多的評估工作都要相關(guān)部門親力親為。存在著行政部門礙于情面等因素，影響評估結(jié)果客觀性和準確性等問題。36三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題第三，“第三方評估”模式仍未全三、社會救助績效評估存在的問題最后，由于各地低保標準和操作管理的具體規(guī)定不盡一致，國家難以推行一套完全統(tǒng)一的社會救助政策績效評估的指標體系和標準。