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(xué)政治與公共事務(wù)管理學(xué)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(jìn)行了低保績效評價方面的探索，并建立了本省的評價指標(biāo)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(jìn)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(biāo)和評價標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》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(jī)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(jī)制）工作管理（標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定、對象管理、資金執(zhí)行、監(jiān)督檢查）工作效果（對象準(zhǔn)確率、補(bǔ)助準(zhǔn)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(dǎo)地方改進(jìn)低保工作、通過“以獎代補(bǔ)”分配中央財政城鄉(xiāng)低保補(bǔ)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(jìn)行社會救助政策的績效考核和評估，我國也有不少學(xué)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(jìn)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(xué)者通過定量研究方法，對社會救助政策績效進(jìn)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(jìn)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(biāo)，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(xué)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(biāo)準(zhǔn)，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(hù)，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(dān)一定的籌資責(zé)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(jī)構(gòu)對社會救助政策的執(zhí)行效果進(jìn)行評估。2009年以來，上海、江蘇等發(fā)達(dá)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(jìn)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(jìn)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(tuán)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(jī)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(jìn)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(biāo)體系構(gòu)建中存在以下問題：考核指標(biāo)體系涵蓋范圍不全面、指標(biāo)的選取不夠恰當(dāng)，以及部分考核指標(biāo)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(zhǔn)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(biāo)準(zhǔn)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(biāo)體系和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。