Unofficial translation
Footnote. Expired by joint order of the acting Minister of digital development, innovation and aerospace industry of the Republic of Kazakhstan from 27.01.2020 No. 32/N and the Chairman of Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on civil service from 28.01.2020 No. 25 (shall be enforced from the day of its first official publication).In accordance with paragraph 39 of the System of annual assessment of the activity effectiveness of central state and local executive bodies of regions, cities of republican significance, the capital city, approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 19, 2010 № 954, WE ORDER:
1. To approve the attached Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body".
2. To recognize as invalid:
1) the joint order of the Minister of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 24, 2017 № 379 and the Chairman of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency dated October 24, 2017 № 232 "On approval of the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of organizational development of state bodies"(registered in the Register of state registration of regulatory legal acts №16133, published on January 11, 2018 in the Standard control bank of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan);
2) the joint order of the Minister of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 27, 2018 № 110 and of the Chairman of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency dated 30 March 2018 № 87 "On amendments and additions to the joint order of the Minister of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 24, 2017 № 379 and the Chairman of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency dated October 24, 2017 № 232 "On approval of the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of organizational development of state bodies" (registered in the Register of state registration of regulatory legal acts № 17162, published on July 17, 2018 in the Standard control bank of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan).
3. The Department of state policy in the field of information and communication technologies of the Ministry of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the manner, established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall ensure:
1) state registration of this order in the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
2) within ten calendar days from the date of state registration of this order, sending it to the Republican state enterprise on the right of economic management "Republican center for legal information" for official publication and inclusion to the Standard control bank of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
3) placement of this order on the Internet resource of the Ministry of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
4) submission of information on implementation of measures provided for in sub-paragraphs 1), 2) and 3) of this paragraph to the Legal department of the Ministry of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan within ten working days after the state registration of this order.
4. Control over execution of this order shall be assigned to the Vice-Minister of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan supervising the issues of informatization, and the Vice-Chairman of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti –corruption Agency, supervising the issues of civil service.
5. This order shall be enforced from the date of its first official publication.
| Minister of Information and Communications | |
| of the Republic of Kazakhstan | D.Abayev |
| Chairman of the Agency | |
| of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs | |
| and Anti -corruption Agency | A. Shpekbayev |
"AGREED"
Minister of National Economy
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block
"Organizational development of a state body"
Chapter 1. General provisions
1. This Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" (hereinafter – the Methodology) is developed to implement the System of annual assessment of the activity effectiveness of central state and local executive bodies of regions, cities of republican significance, the capital city, approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 19 March 2010 № 954 (hereafter- the assessment System).
2. This Methodology is used for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity starting from the period of January 1, 2018. At the same time, the bonus indicators "Strategic personnel planning" and "Level of languages knowledge" are applied for the assessment period from January 1, 2019.
3. The following concepts and definitions are used in this Methodology:
1) substitution of vacant administrative state positions of the corpus "A" – a penalty indicator, determining the level of long-term substitution of vacancies of administrative state positions of the corpus “A”;
2) information and communication service – a service or a set of services for property hire (lease) and (or) placement of computing resources, provision of software, software products, service software products and technical means for use, including communication services, through which the operation of these services is ensured;
3) presence of a structural unit for information technologies – a bonus indicator for local executive bodies in the presence of a structural unit for information technologies, equal to 5 points;
4) turnover of first-time employees – an indicator, determining the effectiveness of mentoring and adaptation of first- time employees in a state body;
5) registration of information systems on the architectural portal – the process of provision by a state body to a service integrator of the request for registration with description of the information system, as well as providing electronic copies of the certificate of input of information system of a state body in trial operation and technical documentation according to the Rules of registration of information systems of state bodies, recording information on objects of informatization "electronic government" and placing electronic copies of technical documentation of the objects of informatization “e-government”, approved by the order № 128 of the acting Minister for Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 28, 2016 (registered in the Register of state registration of regulatory legal acts № 13320);
6) the share of registered information systems of state bodies on the architectural portal – information systems for which registration of information systems of state bodies has been carried out, accounting of information about the objects of informatization of "e-government" and placement of electronic copies of technical documentation of the objects of informatization of “e –government”;
7) ethics and relationships in the team - an indicator, determining the level of development of organizational culture in the state body, as well as the commitment of employees to moral and ethical standards;
8) use of information systems of another state body – an information system owned by another state body designed to automate the processes of rendering state bodies/functions in accordance with the Regulation of the state body;
9) gender composition- an indicator, determining the representation of women in the state body on executive management positions in accordance with the Concept of family and gender policy until 2030;
10) unreliable reporting information – reporting information, in the course of rechecking which the facts not corresponding to reality have been revealed;
11) use of the "E-kyzmet" system – a bonus indicator, determining the level of use of the integrated information system “E-kyzmet”;
12) satisfaction with working conditions – an indicator, determining the level of provision of employees with necessary conditions for proper work;
13) labor rationing- an indicator, determining the availability of overtime work in a state body;
14) stability of the staff - an indicator, determining the level of stability of personnel policy and staff constancy in a state body;
15) transparency of competitive procedures – an indicator, determining the level of transparency of the personnel selection process in a state body;
16) career growth-an indicator, determining the level of compliance with the principle of the career model in a state body;
17) training of civil servants – an indicator, determining the timeliness of sending civil servants for training;
18) transparency of encouragements in a state body – an indicator, determining the level of transparency and fairness of encouragements in a state body;
19) management practices in a state body – an indicator, determining the effectiveness of internal management in a state body;
20) intranet-portal of state bodies – an information system designed to automate business processes and provide information interaction of state bodies through a single window of access to all state information systems, with the exception of electronic information resources of limited access;
21) use of departmental, as well as information systems supervised by state bodies, organizations in spheres and sectors – an information system that is on the balance sheet of a state body, as well as at a subordinate organization, designed to automate functions in accordance with the regulation of a state body;
22) compliance with meritocracy-an indicator, determining the level of compliance of state bodies with the principles of meritocracy;
23) actual effect - the expected effect of implementing an information system (reduction of operating costs, reduction of administrative barriers as a result of increased efficiency; optimization of the process, and so on);
24) net turnover of the staff – an indicator, determining the level of voluntary departure of employees from the civil service system;
25) strategic personnel planning-a bonus indicator, determining presence of personnel management strategy in a state body;
26) incomplete reporting information – reporting information that does not contain certain parts of it (appendices, sections, tables, indicator values, etc.) provided for by the established requirements for the structure of reporting information;
27) level of languages knowledge – a bonus indicator, determining the level of knowledge of the state and English languages by civil servants, as well as the conditions created by the state body for their study;
28) untimely reporting information - reporting information submitted/posted later than the deadline stipulated in the assessment Schedule;
29) exit interview-an indicator, determining the coverage of the survey of retiring employees, as well as the reasons for their dismissal;
30) architectural portal of "electronic government"(hereinafter – architectural portal) – an information system designed for registration, accounting, storage and systematization of information about the objects of informatization of "electronic government" in accordance with the classifier and further use by state bodies for monitoring, analysis and planning in the field of informatization;
31) "e-government" service integrator – a legal entity determined by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which is assigned the functions of methodological support for the development of the architecture of "e-government" and the standard architecture of "e-akimat", as well as support for the assessment of the effectiveness of state bodies in the use of information technologies.
4. The Methodology is designed to determine the effectiveness of measures taken for organizational development in central state bodies (hereinafter – CSB) and local executive bodies of regions, cities of republican significance, the capital city (hereinafter – LEB) (hereinafter –the assessed state bodies).
5. Assessment of effectiveness of organizational development of state bodies (hereinafter – the effectiveness assessment) shall be carried out according to the Schedule of assessment, approved by the order of the Head of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the assessment Schedule) in the following directions:
1) personnel management;
2) application of information technologies.
6. The effectiveness assessment shall be carried out by the following bodies authorized for assessment (hereinafter- the bodies authorized for assessment):
1) by the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan- assessment of the effectiveness of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency (hereinafter-the authorized body for civil service affairs) in the direction of “Personnel management”;
2) by the Office of the Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan – assessment of the effectiveness of the Ministry of Information and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter-the authorized body in the field of informatization) in the direction “Application of information technologies”;
3) by the authorized body for civil service affairs - assessment of the effectiveness of CSB and LEB in the direction of “Personnel management”;
4) by the authorized body in the field of informatization- assessment of the effectiveness of information systems of CSB and LEB in the direction "Application of information technologies".
7. The authorized body in the field of informatization involves the service integrator of "e-government" to support the assessment of the effectiveness of state bodies activity on the use of information technologies.
Chapter 2. Sources of information for assessment the effectiveness of organizational
development of state bodies
8. The assessed state bodies annually within the terms established by the assessment Schedule, shall submit to the bodies authorized for assessment the reporting information on electronic and paper carriers on the results of the reporting (calendar) year:
1) on the results of the exit interview, in the form, according to Appendix 1 to this Methodology;
2) on the number of man-hours worked by civil servants, in the form, according to Appendix 2 to this Methodology;
3) on participation of observers in competitions for vacant positions in a state body, according to Appendix 3 to this Methodology;
4) on promotion of the employees of a state body in the service, in the form, according to Appendix 4 to this Methodology;
5) on the staff number of a state body, in the form, according to Appendix 5 to this Methodology;
6) on the number of civil servants who have been continuously working in a state body for more than three years, in the form, according to Appendix 6 to this Methodology;
7) about the civil servants who are subject to passing and have passed advanced training and retraining, in the form, according to Appendix 7 to this Methodology;
8) on the level of languages knowledge by the civil servants in a state body according to Appendix 8 to this Methodology;
9) a copy of the personnel management strategy of a state body and a summary of its implementation;
10) a report on the use of information technologies in the form according to Appendix 9 to this Methodology.
9. Reliability of the data shall be ensured by the assessed state bodies.
10. Information for conducting an assessment shall be submitted on electronic carriers by the authorized body in the field of informatization to the Office of the Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan, by the authorized body for civil service affairs to the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan according to the assessment Schedule.
11. Assessment shall be carried out by the authorized body for civil service affairs based on the results of analysis of the information submitted, according to sub – paragraphs 1) - 9) of paragraph 8 of this Methodology.
12. Assessment shall be carried out by the authorized body in the field of informatization, based on the results of analysis of the information submitted, according to subparagraph 10) of paragraph 8 of this Methodology.
13. Analysis of the submitted information shall be carried out by the service integrator of "e-government" and shall be provided to the authorized state body in the field of informatization 3 calendar days before the deadline for submission of conclusions by the authorized state body in the field of informatization to the assessed state bodies, set in the assessment Schedule.
14. Sources of information for conducting an assessment in the direction of "Personnel management" shall also be:
1) statistical data, reporting information of state bodies and data of the automated electronic transmission system;
2) data on monitoring the state of civil service personnel in the Republic of Kazakhstan as of January 1 of the year following the reporting period, submitted to the authorized body for civil service affairs annually;
3) results of inspections conducted by the authorized body for civil service affairs in the assessed state bodies;
4) information about the level of use of the integrated information system "E-kyzmet" by state bodies, obtained from this information system;
5) results of the survey of civil servants in the form, according to Appendix 10 to this Methodology;
6) reporting data on substitution of vacant administrative state positions of the corpus "A", provided on a monthly basis to the authorized body for civil service affairs.
15. The architectural portal of state bodies shall also be a source of information for conducting an assessment in the direction "Application of information technologies".
Paragraph 1. Rechecking the data contained in the reporting information
16. In accordance with paragraph 41 of the assessment System the bodies authorized for assessment shall carry out rechecking of the data contained in the reporting information of the assessed state bodies (hereinafter – rechecking), while reporting information of the assessed state bodies subject to be rechecking is determined based on the risks management system.
17. Rechecking is carried out to determine the reliability of the reporting information provided by the assessed state bodies.
The set of organizational measures taken by the bodies authorized for assessment to re-check data on directions of the effectiveness assessment includes the following:
carrying out the measures provided for in this Methodology by the bodies authorized for assessment to establish the compliance of the submitted information with actual data;
sending requests to establish the compliance of the information provided in this Methodology to the assessed state bodies on submission of additional information.
18. Conducting rechecking measures in state bodies shall be carried out according to the assessment Schedule by analyzing confirming documents, as well as viewing information systems.
19. The rechecking procedure consists of collecting confirming documents from the assessed state bodies, conducting reconciliation of reporting information, and drawing up a reconciliation Act based on the results of rechecking the data, contained in the reporting information in the form according to Appendix 11 to this Methodology (hereinafter- the reconciliation Act).
20. As part of rechecking, the bodies authorized for assessment can receive electronic copies of confirming documents, except for the documents that have a security classification, as well as a mark "For official use".
Paragraph 2. Timeliness, completeness and reliability of reporting information
21. The assessed state bodies shall timely submit/place complete and reliable reporting information in accordance with the assessment Schedule.
22. In cases of submission/placement of untimely, incomplete, or unreliable reporting information, penalty points shall be deducted from the final assessment of the assessed state bodies in each direction.
23. For submission/placement of untimely reporting information by the assessed state bodies, 1 (one) penalty point shall be deducted for each calendar day of delay, but no more than 5 penalty points.
5 (five) penalty points shall be deducted for absence of reporting information.
24. 2 (two) penalty points shall be deducted for submission/placement of incomplete reporting information by the assessed state bodies.
25. For the submission/placement of unreliable reporting information by the assessed state bodies, 0.2 penalty points shall be deducted for each recorded fact.
26. Total amount of all penalty points deducted for submission/placement of unreliable information must not exceed 10 points.
27. The facts of submission/placement of unreliable information shall be recorded in the reconciliation Act based on the results of rechecking the data.
28. Information about penalty points shall be reflected in the conclusion on the results of the effectiveness assessment of the state body in the section "Deduction of points".
Chapter 3. Assessment in the direction "Personnel management"
29. Assessment of the effectiveness in the direction "Personnel management" shall be carried out by the authorized body for civil service affairs according to the following criteria:
1) personnel potential of the state body;
2) labor organization;
3) meritocracy and organizational culture.
30. The objects of assessment in the direction of "Personnel Management" shall be CSB and their departments, territorial divisions of CSB and their departments in the regions, cities of regional significance and the capital city, as well as LEB, except for district divisions.
31. The conclusion on the results of assessment the effectiveness of activity of the state body in the direction "Personnel management" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" shall be formed according to Appendix 12 to this Methodology.
Paragraph 1. Assessment on the criterion "Personnel potential of a state body"
32. On the criterion "Personnel potential of a state body", the personnel composition of a state body, its change and the effectiveness of the personnel policy of a state body shall be assessed.
33. Assessment on the criterion "Personnel potential of a state body" (K) is calculated using the following formula:
K = C + S + J + V + G – A,
where:
C-assessment of a state body on the indicator “Net turnover of the staff” (leaving the civil service system at will);
S-assessment of a state body on the indicator “Stability of the staff composition”;
J-assessment of a state body on the indicator “Turnover of first-time employees”;
V-assessment of a state body on the indicator “Exit interview”
G-assessment of a state body on the indicator “Gender composition”;
assessment of a state body on the penalty indicator “Substitution of vacant administrative state positions of the corpus “A”.
The maximum value for this criterion is 30 points.
34. Assessment on the indicator "Net turnover of the staff" (leaving the civil service) (C):
1) if the indicator of net turnover of the staff (t) is less than or equal to 0.06, the maximum score (10 points) shall be assigned to a state body.
The indicator of net turnover of the staff is calculated using the following formula:
where:
t - indicator of net turnover of the staff;
a1-information on net turnover of civil servants holding executive positions obtained as part of monitoring of the state of civil service personnel of the Republic of Kazakhstan, conducted by the authorized body for civil service affairs;
b1-the average number of executive administrative public positions in accordance with the state body's staffing table (the total number of executive administrative public positions in accordance with the state body's staffing table as of the last day of each quarter and is divided by the number of quarters in the year (4);
a2-information on net turnover of civil servants holding non-executive positions obtained as part of monitoring of the state of civil service of the Republic of Kazakhstan, conducted by the authorized body for civil service affairs;
b2-the average number of non-executive administrative public positions in accordance with the state body's staffing table (the total number of non-executive administrative public positions in accordance with the state body's staffing table as of the last day of each quarter and is divided by the number of quarters in the year (4).
2) if the indicator of net turnover of the staff (t) is equal to or more than 0.09, a state body shall be assigned a score of 0 points on the indicator.
3) in all other cases, the assessment on the indicator is calculated using the following formula:
where:
C-assessment on the indicator “Net turnover of the staff”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (10);
t- an indicator of net turnover of the staff.
The maximum value for this indicator is 10 points.
35. Assessment on the indicator "Stability of the staff composition" (S):
where:
S-assessment on the indicator “Stability of the staff composition”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
h – the number of civil servants who have worked continuously for more than three years in the system of this state body;
b- the average actual number of administrative civil servants of a state body (the actual number of employees in the body as of the last day of each month is summed up and divided by the number of months in the year (12);
m – the number of civil servants (from among the appointed ones) who have worked continuously for more than three years in the system of the former state body.
In case of reorganization of a state body or allocation of additional staff units to a state body during the assessed year, the number of state employees (from among the appointed ones) who have worked continuously for more than three years in the system of the former state body shall be taken into account when calculating the assessment on this indicator.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
36. Assessment on the indicator "Stability of the staff composition" (S2) for a newly formed state body (less than three years):
where:
S2- assessment on the indicator “Stability of the staff composition”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
h – the number of civil servants who have worked continuously for more than three years in the civil service system;
b- the average actual number of administrative civil servants of a state body (the actual number of employees in the body as of the last day of each month is summed up and divided by the number of months in the year (12).
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
37. Assessment on the indicator "Turnover of first-time employees" (J):
where:
J- assessment on the indicator “Turnover of first-time employees” ;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
p – the number of civil servants dismissed in the first year of entering the civil service (with the exception of those dismissed after a probationary period and dismissed in connection with an appointment to another public position in the order of transfer);
b – total number of first-time public service appointees (excluding those appointed to temporary vacancies);
1-coefficient of bringing the obtained results to the point value.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
38. Assessment on the indicator "Exit interview" (V):
where:
V- assessment on the indicator “Exit interview”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
a – the number of persons who completed the exit interview in the reporting period from the number of employees dismissed from the civil service system at their own will in the form, according to Appendix 13 to this Methodology;
b – the total number of employees who were dismissed from the civil service system at their own will during the reporting period.
If the majority (50%) of dismissed employees connect their dismissal with the negative aspects of a state body activity (for example, unfavorable moral-psychological climate, non-compliance with ethical standards by the management, overtime work and others), from the result of assessment on indicator "exit interview" 1 penalty point will be deducted.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
39. Assessment on the indicator "Gender composition" (G):
1) if the coefficient of female civil servants, holding executive positions (j) is more than or equal to 0.3, the maximum score (5 points) shall be assigned to a state body.
the coefficient of women civil servants, holding executive positions is calculated using the following formula:
where:
j- coefficient of female civil servants holding executive positions;
a – number of female civil servants holding executive positions as of the last day of the assessed year;
b- the average actual number of civil servants of a state body holding executive positions (the actual number of employees holding executive positions in the body shall be summed up as of the last day of each month and divided by the number of months in the year (12);
2) in all other cases, the assessment for this indicator is calculated using the following formula:
where:
G- assessment on the indicator “Gender composition”
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
j- ratio of female civil servants, holding executive positions;
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
40. Assessment on the penalty indicator "Substitution of vacant administrative state positions of the corpus "A" (A):
where:
A - assessment on the penalty indicator "Substitution of vacant administrative state positions of the corpus "A";
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (1.5);
d – the number of long-term vacant administrative state positions of the corpus "A" (more than three months) during the assessed period;
v- the average number of administrative state positions of the corpus "A" in accordance with the state body's staffing table (the number of administrative state positions in accordance with the state body's staffing table as of the last day of each quarter shall be summed up and divided by the number of quarters in the year (4);
1-coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the point value.
When calculating the assessment on this indicator for LEB, the positions of mayors of the cities of regional significance (with the exception of mayors of cities that are the administrative centers of regions), districts of regions and districts in cities shall also be taken into account.
The maximum value for this indicator is 1.5 penalty points.
Paragraph 2. Assessment on the criterion “Labor organization”
41. On the criterion "Labor organization of" the level of organization of working processes within the state body through creation of comfortable working conditions and an effective personnel management system is assessed.
42. Assessment on the criterion "Labor organization" (O) is calculated using the following formula:
O = N + T + Y + S + U + E,
where:
O- assessment on the criterion "Labor organization";
N- an indicator “Labor rationing”;
T- an indicator “Satisfaction with working conditions”;
Y- an indicator "Management practices in a state body".
U- an indicator “Training of civil servants”;
S- a bonus indicator “Strategic personnel planning”;
E- a bonus indicator "Use of the "E-kyzmet" system.
The maximum value for this criterion is 30 points.
Note: the bonus indicator "Strategic personnel planning" is used during assessment for the period from January 1, 2019.
43. Assessment of CSB on the indicator "Labor rationing" (N):
where:
N - assessment of CSB on the indicator “Labor rationing”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (15);
a – an average number of man- hours in a state body on working days;
b – normal duration of working time in the aggregate for the reporting period;
1-coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the point value;
8- an indicator of stiffness set based on the average value of overtime work more than 1 hour per day.
The average number of man-hours per working days (a) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
m – the total number of man-hours worked by civil servants during the reporting period on working days, including overtime (m is calculated taking into account the 10 minutes required for a civil servant to leave the building of a state body after the end of the working day);
n – the average actual number of employees of a state body (the actual number of employees in the body as of the last day of each month shall be summed up and divided by the number of months in the year (12).
The total number of man-hours worked by civil servants during the reporting period on working days is calculated according to the data of the automated electronic access system.
Normal duration of working time in the aggregate for the reporting period is determined by the following formula:
where:
b – normal duration of working time in the aggregate for the reporting period;
d – the total number of working days for the reporting period;
21 – number of days of paid annual labor leave, excluding weekends;
8- duration of the working day (in hours).
44. If the obtained result for the indicator "Labor rationing" is a value with a minus sign, a state body shall be assigned 0 points.
45. The average number of man-hours worked on weekends and holidays shall be taken into account when calculating the "Labor rationing" indicator. Hours of overtime, worked by a civil servant on the basis of an employer's act in accordance with labor legislation shall not be taken into account when calculating the average number of man-hours on weekends and holidays.
In the case of overtime work on weekends and public holidays, a state body shall be assigned penalty points according to the following scale:
Average number of man-hours on weekends and holidays | Penalty points |
9-184 hours |
1 penalty point |
over 184 hours | 2 penalty points |
The average number of man-hours on weekends and holidays (s) is determined by the following formula:
where:
p – total number of man-hours worked by civil servants during the reporting period on weekends and holidays;
n – the average actual number of employees of a state body (the actual number of employees in the body as of the last day of each month shall be summed up and divided by the number of months in the year (12).
The total number of man-hours worked by civil servants during the reporting period on weekends and holidays is calculated according to the data of the automated electronic access system.
The maximum value for this indicator is 15 points.
46. Assessment of LEB on the indicator "Labor rationing" (N) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
N- assessment of LEB on the indicator “Labor rationing”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (15);
i1 - index of agreement with statement 1 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i2- index of agreement with statement 2 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i3 – index of agreement with statement 3 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
The maximum value for this indicator is 15 points.
47. Assessment on the indicator "Satisfaction with working conditions" (T) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
T- assessment on the indicator “Satisfaction with working conditions”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
i4 – index of agreement with statement 4 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i5 - index of agreement with statement 5 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i6 - index of agreement with statement 6 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i7 - index of agreement with statement 7 of the questionnaire of civil servants.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
48. Assessment on the indicator "Management practices in a state body" (Y) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
Y- assessment on the indicator “Management practices in a state body”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
i8 – index of agreement with statement 8 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i9 - index of agreement with statement 9 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i10 – index of agreement with statement 10 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i11- index of agreement with statement 11 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i12- index of agreement with statement 12 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i13 – index of agreement with statement 13 of the questionnaire of civil servants.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
49. The index of agreement with approvals (i) is used to transfer an assessment on a scale from 1 to 4 into a range from 0 to 1. Calculation formula:
where:
i – index of agreement with approval;
x – the arithmetic mean value of the assessment according to the questionnaire on a scale from 1 to 4 (the sum of the values of approvals divided by the number of people interviewed);
1 – the minimum arithmetic mean value of the assessment corresponding to 0 on a scale from 0 to 1;
3- the difference between the maximum (4) and minimum (1) value on a scale from 1 to 4.
50. Assessment on the indicator "Training of civil servants" (U) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
U- assessment on the indicator “Training of civil servants”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
a – the number of civil servants, passed advanced training in the reporting period, from among those subject within the allocated budget funds;
b – the number of civil servants subject to advanced training in the reporting period within the allocated budget funds;
c – the number of civil servants retrained in the reporting period, from among those subject within the allocated budget funds;
d – the number of civil servants subject to retraining in the reporting period within the allocated budget funds;
0.5- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the point value.
If there are no civil servants subject to advanced training in the assessed period, a/b = 1.
If there are no civil servants subject to retraining in the assessed period, c/d = 1.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points
51. Assessment on the bonus indicator "Strategic personnel planning" (S):
This indicator assesses the strategic management of human resources and personnel policy of a state body.
If the state body has an approved personnel management Strategy, in accordance with the Model regulation on the personnel management service (HR service) (hereinafter – the Model regulation), approved by the order of the Chairman of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency dated October 21, 2016 №15 (registered in the Register of state registration of regulatory legal acts № 14456), a state body shall be assigned 1.5 bonus points for this indicator.
If the state body does not have an approved personnel management Strategy in accordance with the Model regulation, bonus points shall not be assigned to a state body.
The maximum value for the bonus indicator is 1.5 points.
Note: the Bonus indicator "Strategic personnel" (S) is applied for the assessment period from January 1, 2019.
52. Assessment on the bonus indicator "Use of the “E-kyzmet” system" is calculated using the following formula:
E=k/s,
where:
E- assessment on the indicator “Use of the “E-kyzmet”system”;
k – total number of personnel documents processed in the "E-kyzmet" information system in automatic mode (except for the documents in manual input mode);
s – average actual number of administrative civil servants of a state body (the actual number of employees in the body as of the last day of each month is summed up and divided by the number of months in the year (12).
At the same time, “automatic mode” means implementation by the users of the information system"E-kyzmet" of processes for preparation, approval, signing and registration of documents on the issues of personnel management in electronic form in the information system "E-kyzmet".
"Manual input mode" means implementation of processes for preparation, approval, signing and registration of documents outside the "E-kyzmet" system, which are then entered into the system for accounting.
Number of bonus points of the state body for this indicator is determined in accordance with the following scale:
indicator (E) is equal to or more than 6-1. 5 points;
indicator (E) is equal to or more than 5 – 1 point;
indicator (E) is equal to or more than 4-0. 5 points;
In all other cases, bonus points shall not be assigned.
The maximum value on the bonus indicator is 1.5 points.
Paragraph 3. Assessment on the criterion “Meritocracy and organizational culture”
53. On the criterion "Meritocracy and organizational culture" the effectiveness of a state body activity on implementation of the principles of meritocracy and establishing business relationships within the organization, compliance with ethical standards by civil servants is assessed.
54. Assessment on the criterion “Meritocracy and culture” (M) is calculated using the following formula:
M = A + B + C + D + E + F,
where:
M-assessment of a state body according to the criterion “Meritocracy and organizational culture”;
A-an indicator “Transparency of competitive procedures”;
B-an indicator “Compliance with meritocracy”;
C-an indicator “Career growth”;
D-an indicator “Transparency of encouragements in a state body”;
E-an indicator “Ethics and relationships in the team”;
F-an indicator “Level of languages knowledge”.
The maximum value for this criterion is 40 points.
Note: An indicator "Level of languages knowledge" is applied for the assessment period from January 1, 2019.
55. Assessment on the indicator "Transparency of competitive procedures" (A):
where:
A-assessment on the indicator “Transparency of competitive procedures”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (10);
a – the number of held tenders for occupying vacant positions in a state body, held with participation of the observers;
b – the total number of held tenders for occupying vacant positions.
The maximum value for this indicator is 10 points.
56. Assessment on the indicator "Compliance with meritocracy" (B):
where:
A-assessment on the indicator "Compliance with meritocracy";
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (10);
i14- index of agreement with statement 14 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i15 – index of agreement with statement 15 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i16- index of agreement with statement 16 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i 17- index of agreement with statement 17 of the questionnaire of civil servants.
The maximum value for this indicator is 10 points.
57. Assessment on the indicator "Career growth" (C):
where:
A-assessment on the indicator “Career growth”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (10);
a – the number of civil servants appointed to a higher position in the system of this state body during the reporting period from among the employees of the system of this state body;
b – the total number of civil servants appointed to higher positions in a state body during the reporting period (excluding lower-level positions).
In case of reorganization of a state body, as well as for a newly formed state body during the assessed year, the number of civil servants appointed to a higher position in this state body during the reporting period in comparison with the previous state position in another state body shall be taken into account when calculating the assessment on this indicator.
The maximum value for this indicator is 10 points.
58. Assessment on indicator "Transparency of encouragements in a state body" (D) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
D-assessment on the indicator “Transparency of encouragements in a state body”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
i18 – index of agreement with statement 18 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i19- index of agreement with statement 19 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i20 – index of agreement with statement 20 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i21 – index of agreement with statement 21 of the questionnaire of civil servants.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
59. Assessment on the indicator "Ethics and relationships in the team" (E) is calculated using the following formula:
where:
E- assessment on the indicator “Ethics and relationships in the team”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (5);
i22- index of agreement with statement 22 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i23- index of agreement with statement 23 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i24- index of agreement with statement 24 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i 25- index of agreement with statement 25 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i 26 - index of agreement with statement 26 of the questionnaire of civil servants;
i27 - index of agreement with statement 27 of the questionnaire of civil servants.
The maximum value for this indicator is 5 points.
60. The agreement index with approvals (i) is used to transfer an assessment on a scale from 1 to 4 into a range from 0 to 1. Calculation formula:
where:
i – index of agreement with approval;
x – arithmetic mean value of the assessment according to the questionnaire on a scale from 1 to 4( the sum of the values of approvals divided by the number of people interviewed);
1 – the minimum arithmetic mean of the assessment corresponding to 0 on a scale from 0 to 1;
3- the difference between the maximum (4) and minimum (1) value on a scale from 1 to 4.
61. Assessment on the bonus indicator "Level of languages knowledge" (F):
where:
A-assessment on the bonus indicator “Level of languages knowledge”;
k- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the weight value (1.5);
a – the number of civil servants, having a certificate of successful completion of the exam on state language proficiency assessment system "KazTest" (not lower than level B1);
b – the number of civil servants, having a certificate of successful completion of the English language proficiency assessment system "IELTS" (at least 4.5) or equivalent (TOEFLPBT at least 477, TOEFLIBT at least 53, APTIS at least B1 CEFR) or who have graduated from higher education institutions in English;
c- average actual number of civil servants of a state body (the actual number of employees in a body as of the last day of each quarter is summed up and divided by the number of quarters in the year (4);
0.5- coefficient for bringing the obtained results to the point value.
The maximum value for this indicator is 1.5 points.
Note: Bonus indicator "Level of languages knowledge" is applied for the assessed period from January 1, 2019.
Paragraph 4. Final assessment of state bodies in the direction “Personnel management”
62. Assessment of the activity effectiveness in the direction "Personnel management" is calculated using the following formula:
H = K + O + M – W,
where:
H – overall score in the direction “Personnel management”;
K- point on the criterion “Personnel potential of a state body”;
O- point on the criterion "Labor organization";
M- point on the criterion “Meritocracy and organizational culture”;
W- penalty points.
Points are given according to criteria and indicators for assessment the activity effectiveness of a state body in the direction "Personnel Management" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" in the form according to Appendix 14 to this Methodology.
Chapter 4. Assessment in the direction “Application of information technologies”
63. Assessment of the effectiveness in the direction "Application of information technologies" shall be carried out according to the following criteria:
1) filling of the architectural portal;
2) functional performance of information systems;
3) efficiency of information systems of state bodies;
4) automation of functions of state bodies;
5) using the Intranet-portal of state bodies.
64. Conclusions on the results of assessment of the use of information technologies in central state bodies and local executive bodies shall be formed in the form according to Appendix 15 to this Methodology.
Paragraph 1. Assessment on the criterion “Filling of the architectural portal”
65. On the criterion "Filling of the architectural portal", the degree of filling of the architectural portal by state bodies shall be assessed and conducted according to the information placed on the architectural portal. The assessment is aimed at encouraging state bodies to placement packages of documents and necessary information about information systems on the architectural portal in accordance with Appendix 19 to this Methodology.
66. Assessment on the criterion "Filling of the architectural portal" (A):
where:
A – the degree of filling of the architectural portal by the assessed state body;
m – the number of documents submitted by the assessed state body for registration of information systems;
s – the number of documents in accordance with the List of normative and technical documentation specified in Appendix 19.
n – total number of information systems of the assessed state body and their departmental and subordinate organizations;
k1- coefficient equal to 30.
The maximum value for this criterion is 30 points.
67. If there are no information systems on the balance sheet of a state body, the assessed state body provides information in the form of a certificate of their absence and shall be assigned 0 points for this criterion.
Paragraph 2. Assessment on the criterion “Functional performance of information systems”
68. Assessment on this criterion is aimed at forming a complete picture of the functional performance of information systems of all assessed state bodies and their departmental and subordinate organizations, as well as the analysis of their development potential in accordance with the technical document describing this procedure.
69. Assessment on the criterion "Functional performance of information systems" (B):
where:
B – level of functional performance of information systems of the assessed state body;
n – number of surveyed information systems;
Pn – number of functions of the surveyed information system specified in the terms of reference for its development;
Fn – number of functions of the surveyed information system specified in the terms of reference for its development, the implementation of which was confirmed during the assessment;
k - coefficient equal to 20.
70. The body authorized for assessment selects at least 2 and no more than 5 information systems (if available) of the assessed state body for demonstration and analysis of functional performance.
71. The results of the analysis of the declared and actually implemented functions of information systems are included in the conclusion on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of the assessed state body.
72. If there are no information systems on the balance sheet of a state body, the assessed state body provides the information in the form of a certificate of their absence and shall be assigned 0 points on this criterion.
The maximum value for this criterion is 20 points.
Paragraph 3. Assessment on the criterion “Effectiveness of information
systems of state bodies”
73. Assessment on this criterion is aimed at studying the effects achieved through the implementation of information systems of the assessed state body and information systems of its departmental and subordinate organizations according to the document describing this procedure.
74. Assessment on the criterion "Effectiveness of information systems of state bodies" (C):
where:
C- effectiveness of information systems of state bodies;
Pn – the declared effect of the information system of the assessed state body, specified in the feasibility study (if any) for its development;
En – the actual effect of the information system of the assessed state body;
n – total number of information systems of the assessed state body;
k- coefficient equal to 20.
75. In the absence of a feasibility study, you must follow the terms of reference, which specifies the purpose, aim of the system, as well as the criteria for assessment the achievement of the aim.
76. The results of the analysis of the declared and actually observed effects from the use of information systems, indicating the share of achievement for each of them and the average level of achievement of all effects shall be included in the conclusion on the results of assessment the activity effectiveness of the assessed state body.
The maximum value for this criterion is 20 points.
Paragraph 4. Assessment on the criterion “Automation of functions of state bodies”
77. Assessment on this criterion is aimed at a comprehensive study of the work on automation of the activities of the assessed state bodies.
78. Assessment on the criterion "Automation of functions of state bodies" (D):
where:
D – automation of functions of state bodies;
F1 – number of functions of the assessed state body that are automated through the information systems of this state body, or the information systems of its departmental and subordinate organizations;
F2 – number of functions of the assessed state body that are automated through information and communication services, as well as service software products implemented within the framework of the service model of informatization;
F3 – number of functions of the assessed state body that are automated through the information systems of other state bodies, or the information systems of their departmental and subordinate organizations;
F4 – number of functions of the assessed state body that are automated through third-party information systems in the framework of providing public services at the expense of the budget of a state body;
n – total number of functions of the assessed state body subject to automation;
k- coefficient equal to 20.
79. The authorized body in the field of informatization compares the list of functions subject to automation approved by the internal regulatory act of the assessed state body with the position of the state body.
80. In case of absence of a list of functions subject to automation approved by the internal regulatory act of the assessed state body, the share of automated functions shall be assessed in comparison with the total number of functions contained in the regulation on the assessed state body.
81. "Unified electronic document management system", "Electronic document management system" and "Intranet-portal of state bodies" are taken into account in calculation according to this criterion only when automating functions of an interdepartmental nature.
The maximum value for this criterion is 20 points.
Paragraph 5. Assessment on the criterion “Use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies”
82. Assessment on this criterion is aimed at identifying availability of departmental statistics and other information placed by state bodies on the intranet-portal of state bodies in accordance with the approved list.
83. Assessment on the criterion "Use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies" is carried out based on the following indicators:
1) availability of an approved list of information of state bodies subject to publication in the module "Library of documents" of the Intranet-portal of state bodies;
2) the degree of filling of the folder of the assessed state body according to the list.
84. Assessment on the criterion "Use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies" is calculated using the following formula (E):
E = L + T,
where:
E-use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies;
L- availability of an approved list of information of state bodies subject to publication in the module "Library of documents" of the Intranet-portal of state bodies, equal to 3 points;
T – the degree of filling of the folder of the assessed state body according to the list.
85. On the indicator "the degree of filling of the folder of the assessed state body according to the list", an assessment is conducted as follows: if the module "Library of documents" of the Intranet-portal of state bodies has 100% of the published information, the public authority shall be assigned 7 points. If more than 70% or less than 100% of the information is available, the score is 5 points. If less than 70% of the information is available, the score is 0 points.
The maximum value for this criterion is 10 points.
Paragraph 6. Final assessment of state bodies in the direction of
“Application of information technologies”
86. Assessment of the activity effectiveness in the direction "Application of information technologies" is calculated using the formula:
I = A + B + C + D + E,
where:
I – general score in the direction “Application of information technologies”;
A - point in the direction “Filling of the architectural portal”;
A-point on the criterion “Functional performance of information systems”;
B-point on the criterion “Efficiency of information systems of state bodies”;
C-point on the criterion “Automation of functions of state bodies”;
E- point on the criterion "Use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies".
87. Points are awarded according to the criteria and indicators for assessment the effectiveness activity of a state body in the direction "Application of information technologies" of the block "Organizational development of a state body", in the form according to Appendix 16 to this Methodology.
Chapter 5. General assessment of the effectiveness of a state body in the block
“Organizational development of a state body”
88. General assessment of the effectiveness of a state body in the block "Organizational development of a state body" shall be determined by the following formula:
where:
O- general assessment in the block “Organizational development of a state body”;
H – final assessment in the direction "Personnel management", taking into account the deduction of penalty points in this direction;
I – final assessment in the direction "Application of information technologies", taking into account the deduction of penalty points in this direction.
89. In accordance with the obtained results of the assessment, the degree of the activity effectiveness of a state body in the block "Organizational development of a state body" shall be determined.
A high degree of efficiency of a state body corresponds to a score from 90 to 100 points, an average degree – from 70 to 89.99 points, a low degree-from 50 to 69.99 points. The activity of a state body that scores less than 50 points is considered ineffective.
90. Conclusions on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of the assessed state bodies in the block "Organizational development of a state body" shall be formed by the authorized body in the field of informatization in the form according to Appendix 17 to this Methodology and submitted to the authorized body for state planning.
Chapter 6. Conclusion on the results of assessment the effectiveness of organizational
development of a state body
91. The Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall form a conclusion on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of an authorized body for civil service affairs in the direction "Personnel management" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" in the form according to Appendix 12 to this Methodology and is submitted to the authorized body for civil service affairs.
92. After conducting the procedure for appealing the results of the efficiency assessment in the direction "Personnel management" in the authorized body for civil service affairs, the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan submits a conclusion on the results of the efficiency assessment to the authorized body in the field of informatization.
93. The office of the Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall form a conclusion on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of the authorized body in the sphere of informatization in the direction "Use of information technologies" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" in the form according to Appendix 15 to this Methodology and submit to the authorized body in the sphere of informatization.
94. After conducting the procedure of appeal against the results of efficiency assessment in the direction "Use of information technologies" in the authorized body in the sphere of informatization, the Office of the Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall submit the conclusion on the results of efficiency assessment to the authorized body in the sphere of informatization.
95. The authorized body for civil service affairs shall form a conclusion on the results of the activity effectiveness of the assessed state bodies in the direction "Personnel management" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" in the form according to Appendix 12 to this Methodology and is submitted to the assessed state bodies.
96. After conducting the procedure for appealing the results of the efficiency assessment, the authorized body for civil service affairs shall submit a conclusion on the results of the efficiency assessment in the direction "Personnel management" to the authorized body in the field of informatization.
97. Conclusions on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of the assessed state bodies in the direction "Application of information technologies" of the block "Organizational development of a state body" shall be formed by the authorized body in the field of informatization in the form according to Appendix 15 to this Methodology and submitted to the assessed state bodies.
Chapter 7. Procedure for appealing the results of assessment
98. From the moment of receiving the assessment results, the assessed state body, in case of disagreement with the assessment results, sends objections with confirming documents to the bodies authorized for assessment within five working days.
99. If there are no objections to the assessment results, the assessed state body must submit a corresponding notification to the bodies authorized for assessment within five working days. Upon expiration of the established period, the objections of the assessed state bodies will not be accepted.
100. If justified objections are received, a Special commission shall be created for conducting the appeal procedure in the direction "Personnel management" in the authorized body for civil service affairs, which may not include the employees, participated in the assessment of state bodies that submitted objections. The number and composition of the Special commission is determined by the body authorized for assessment independently, but not less than 5 people.
101. For conducting the appeal procedure in the direction "Application of information technologies", a Special commission shall be created in the authorized body in the field of informatization, which may not include the employees, participated in the assessment of state bodies that submitted objections. The number and composition of the Special commission is determined by the body authorized for assessment independently, but not less than 5 people.
102. Within five working days from the date of receipt of objections from the assessed state bodies with confirming documents, the tables of disagreements in the form, according to Appendix 18 to this Methodology, shall be formed in the bodies authorized for assessment and submitted to the Special commission for consideration.
103. The Special commission holds meetings on consideration objections and determining the objectivity of the assessment results, to which the representatives of the assessed state bodies that submitted objections are invited, as well as the employees who participated in the assessment of state bodies.
104. The Special commission decides to agree or disagree with the objections of the assessed state bodies.
105. Based on the results of the meetings of the Special commission and adoption of a collegial decision on the results of consideration of the objections, the Table of disagreements shall be finalized and signed by the Chairman of the Special commission and the representative of the assessed state body.
106. In accordance with the Decree, the bodies authorized for assessment shall send the results of the appeal on acceptance or rejection of objections to the working body of the Commission for assessment the activity effectiveness of state bodies and the assessed state bodies within fifteen calendar days. The results of the appeal of the body authorized for assessment on acceptance or non-acceptance of objections shall not be subject to revision.
107. If objections are accepted, the bodies authorized for assessment shall make appropriate adjustments to the conclusion on the results of the efficiency assessment.
108. The assessed state bodies have the right to appeal the results of the assessment to the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan within 5 working days after passing the appeal procedure in the authorized body.
| Appendix 1 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the results of the exit interview
№ п\п | Name of the structural division | Number of the dismissed civil servants for the reporting period | Number of held exit interviews with civil servants (in written or electronic form) | Reason for dismissal of a civil servant (specify the name of the reason and the number of the dismissed servants for this reason) |
1. | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | |||
1.1 | Name of the department | |||
… | ||||
1.1.1 | Name of the departments administrations | |||
… | ||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | |||
2 | Departments of a state body (administration and so on) | |||
2.1 | Name of the administration | |||
… | ||||
2.2 | Territorial divisions of the department | |||
… | … | |||
Total |
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ___________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 2 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the number of man-hours worked by civil servants
№ п\п |
Full name of a structural division in accordance with the state body's staff schedule | Number of man-hours worked in the structural division on working days | Number of man-hours worked in the structural division on weekends and holidays | Average actual number of structural division* |
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | |||
1.1 | Name of the department | |||
… | ||||
1.1.1 | Name of the departments administrations | |||
… | ||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | |||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | |||
2.1 | Name of the administration | |||
… | ||||
2.2 | Territorial divisions of the department | |||
… | ||||
Total |
* the actual number of employees in the structural division of the assessed state body is summed up as of the last day of each quarter and divided by the number of quarters in the year (4).
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 3 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on participation of observers in the competitions for vacant
positions in a state body
№ п\п | Competitions held in the reporting period for occupying vacant positions in a state body ( indicating the number of the Protocol on holding the competition and positions) | Presence of an observer * | Video recording* | ||
yes | no | yes | no | ||
Internal competition among civil servants of this state body | |||||
1 | |||||
2 | |||||
3 | |||||
… | |||||
Internal competition among civil servants of all state bodies | |||||
1 | |||||
2 | |||||
3 | |||||
… | |||||
General competition | |||||
1 | |||||
2 | |||||
3 | |||||
… | |||||
* put a label in the "yes" or "no" column
Total number of competitions held in the reporting period: __________ (enter the quantity).
Of them with participation of the observers: ________________ (enter the quantity)
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 4 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block |
|
| "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the promotion of employees of a state body in the service
№ п/п | Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the person appointed to a higher position |
This person is appointed to a higher position from among the current civil servants of this state body | Full name of the position held, indicating the full name of the structural division (branch, administration, department) according to the staffing table of a state body, indicating the category of a state position | Full name of the previously held position, indicating the full name of the structural division (branch, administration, department) according to the staffing table of a state body, indicating the category of a state position | The date of acceptance for the position, number of the order of appointment |
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | ||||
1.1 | Name of the department | ||||
… | |||||
1.1.1 | Name of the departments administrations | ||||
… | |||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | ||||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | ||||
2.1 | Name of the administration | ||||
… | |||||
2.2 | Territorial divisions of the department | ||||
… | |||||
Total |
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ___________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 5 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the staff size of a state body
1 quarter | 2 quarter | 3 quarter | 4 quarter | |
Number of administrative positions according to the staffing table as of the last day of the quarter. | ||||
Number of executive administrative state positions according to the staffing table of a state body | ||||
Number of non-executive administrative state positions according to the staffing table of a state body | ||||
1 month | 2 month | 3 month | и так далее… etc… | |
Number of administrative state positions of the corpus "A" according to the staffing table as of the last day of the month (for LEB taking into account the positions of mayors of the cities of regional significance (except for mayors of the cities that are administrative centers of the regions), districts of regions and districts in the cities). | ||||
Actual number of administrative civil servants of a state body as of the last day of the month | ||||
Actual number of civil servants of a state body as of the last day of the month | ||||
Actual number of civil servants of a state body holding executive positions as of the last day of the month | ||||
Number of female civil servants holding executive positions as of the last day of the assessed year (one value is indicated) | ||||
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 6 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the number of civil servants who have worked continuously for more than
three years in the civil service system
№ п/п | Name of the structural division | Surname Name Patronymic (if any)/ Number and date of the order (s) on appointment to the position |
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | |
1.1 | Name of the department | |
… | ||
1.1.1 | Name of the departments administrations | |
… | ||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | |
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | |
2.1 | Name of the administration | |
… | ||
2.2 | Territorial divisions of the department | |
… | ||
Total: | ||
Information on the number of civil servants (from among the appointed ones ) who have worked continuously for more than three years in the system of the former state body (Indicated only in the case of reorganization of a state body or allocation of additional staff units to the state body during the assessed year) | ||
… | ||
Total: | ||
Information on the number of civil servants who have worked continuously for more than three years in the civil service system (Indicated only by the newly formed state body (less than three years) | ||
… | ||
Total: | ||
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 7 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on civil servants subject to training and passed professional
development and retraining
№ п/п | Name |
Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the persons subject to professional development, full name of the position held, structural division | Information on passing professional development by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign and on what topic) | Information on passing professional development by the employee, later than the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign and on what topic) | Information on non-passing professional development by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | ||||
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | ||||||||
Total | |||||||||
Information on civil servants who were appointed for the first time to an executive administrative position of the corpus "B" subject to retraining and passed retraining | |||||||||
№ п/п | Name | Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the persons appointed for the first time to an executive administrative position of the corps "B" subject to retraining, full name of the position held, numbers and dates of the order (s) on appointment to the position of a structural division (administration department) | Information on passing retraining by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | Information on passing retraining by the employee, later than the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | Information on non-passing retraining by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | ||||
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | ||||||||
Total | |||||||||
Information on civil servants, first entered the administrative civil service of the corpus "B" subject to retraining and passed retraining | |||||||||
№ п/п | Name | Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the persons, first entered the administrative civil service of the corps "B" subject to retraining, full name of the position held, numbers and dates of the order (s) on appointment to the position of a structural division (administration department) | Information on passing retraining by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | Information on passing retraining by the employee, later than the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | Information on non-passing retraining by the employee within the established terms (indicate with the "+" sign) | ||||
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | ||||||||
… | |||||||||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | ||||||||
Total | |||||||||
Head of a state body
_____________ _____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ___________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 8 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Information on the level of knowledge of languages by civil servants in a state body
№ п/п | Name | Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the persons, having a certificate of successful completion of the exam on the assessment system of the state language proficiency "KazTest" (not lower than B1 level); | Surname Name Patronymic (if any) of the persons, having a certificate of successful completion of the English language proficiency assessment system "IELTS" ( at least level 4.5) or the corresponding equivalent, or who have graduated from higher educational institutions in English; |
1 | Central office of a state body, the office of the mayor (information is provided in the context of departments, offices, and so on) | ||
… | |||
1.2 | Territorial divisions of a state body, the akimat administration | ||
… | |||
2 | Departments of a state body (information is provided in the context of administrations, and so on) | ||
Total |
Head of a state body
_____________ _____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 9 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Report on application of information technologies
_________________________________
(name of CSB/LEB)
Report on criteria:
1) functional performance of information systems;
2) efficiency of information systems of state bodies;
3) automation of functions of state bodies;
4) using the Intranet-portal of state bodies.
Table 1. According to the criterion “Functional performance of information systems”
№ п/п | Name of the information system | Declared function of the information system | The corresponding item in the terms of reference for this function |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Table 2. According to the criterion “Efficiency of information systems of state bodies”
№ п/п | The name of the information system the | Declared effect of the information system | Value of the expected effect | Unit of measurement of the effect | Period of occurrence of the expected effect (if any) | The actual effect of the information system | Confirming technical document |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
Table 3. According to the criterion “Automation of functions of state bodies”
№ п/п | Number of the function in the Regulation of a state body | Function of a state body | Automated by: | |||
Name of information systems of a state body, or information systems of its subordinate organizations | Name of IC- services and service software products implemented within the service model of informatization | Name of information systems of other state bodies or information systems of their subordinate organizations | Names of information systems of third-party organizations in the framework of rendering public services at the expense of the budget of a state body | |||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
* it is necessary to attach a list of functions subject to automation, approved by the internal regulatory act of the assessed state body in a scanned version
Table 4. According to the criterion “Use of the Intranet-portal of state bodies”
№ п/п | Name of the document placed on the IPSB | Description of the document | Availability of an approved list of information* |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
*it is necessary to attach an approved list of information of state bodies subject to publication in module "Library of documents" of the IPSB
Head of a state body
_____________ _____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 10 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Questionnaire for civil servants
The Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency conducts a survey of civil servants in order to assess the effectiveness of personnel management of state bodies. The survey is anonymous.
Do you agree with the following statements? Mark the degrees of agreement on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1-absolutely disagree, 5-absolitely agree. Please select only one of the answer options.
Statements (i) | Answer options |
Labor rationing | |
1. Do you stay at work after the end of working hours without a written order from administration? |
4. No, this was not the case, if involved in overtime work, it was only by the written order of the administration |
2. I have to stay at work without a written order from administration and on average the duration of overtime is |
4. No, this was not the case, if involved in overtime work, it was only by the written order of the administration |
3. Did you go to work on weekends or holidays without a written order from administration during the year? |
4. No, this was not the case, if involved in overtime work, it was only by the written order of the administration |
Satisfaction with working conditions | |
4. I am satisfied with my work in my state body |
4. Absolutely agree |
5. I have sufficient technical equipment to perform my professional duties (office equipment, stationery, lighting, etc.) |
4. Absolutely agree |
6. I have enough time to maintain a balance between work and personal life |
4. Absolutely agree |
7. I am provided with uninterrupted access to all information systems necessary for the performance of my work |
4. Absolutely agree |
Management practices in a state body | |
8. I can freely contact the first head of a state body (department) on professional issues |
4. Absolutely agree |
9. My administration notes my achievements in professional development |
4. Absolutely agree |
10. There are enough employees in my division to perform the necessary amount of work |
4. Absolutely agree |
11. Assignments are distributed efficiently among the performers in my state body |
4. Absolutely agree |
12. I get tasks with an accessible and clear explanation for their execution |
4. Absolutely agree |
13. I am free to complete the work assigned to me every day |
4. Absolutely agree |
Compliance with meritocracy | |
14. The procedure for hiring employees in my state body is transparent and fair |
4. Absolutely agree |
15. My state body employs talented and qualified employees |
4. Absolutely agree |
16. In my state body, worthy employees get promoted deservedly (without relationships or patronage) |
4. Absolutely agree |
17. I believe that I will be able to get a promotion in my state body if I perform my duties in a timely and high-quality manner |
4. Absolutely agree |
Transparency of encouragements in a state body | |
18. I am satisfied with the encouragement measures taken in my state body (financial encouragements) |
4. Absolutely agree |
19. The procedure for financial encouragement in my state body is fair and transparent |
4. Absolutely agree |
20. Measures of non-financial encouragement (awards, diploma, letters of gratitude, honor boards) are applied fairly in my state body |
4. Absolutely agree |
21. I have never encountered the facts of favoritism in distribution of financial encouragement in my state body |
4. Absolutely agree |
Ethics and relationships in the team | |
22. In my state body, cases of unethical behavior (rudeness, insults, obscenities, physical abuse) on the part of administration to subordinates occur |
4. Never |
23. In my state body, cases of unethical behavior (rudeness, insults, obscenities, physical abuse) between colleagues occur |
4. Never |
24. Please describe the atmosphere in your work team |
4. Favorable moral and psychological climate |
25. In my state body I did not have to deal with abuse of office by my superiors and other employees |
4. Absolutely agree |
26. I did not have to be a witness to high- pitched conversations with obscene language at work |
4. Absolutely agree |
27. I carry out instructions (of administration) that are not related to my direct official duties |
4. Never |
Additional questions | |
28. Do you plan to quit the civil service in the near future? |
1. Yes |
29. Would you like to transfer to another state body? |
1. Yes |
30. What do you think are the reasons for overwork of employees in your state body? |
7. Receipt of letters /orders with tight deadlines |
31. My state body uses a program of automatically shutdown of computers after office hours |
1. Yes |
32. Does the automatic shutdown of computers after office hours work effectively in your state body? |
4. Yes, there is no possibility to extend the computer's operation |
33. I am satisfied with the salary level and in general it corresponds to the level in other private or other organizations where I can find work |
4. Absolutely agree |
34. What measures of non-financial encouragements are applied in your state body |
6. Awards |
35. If you have completed advanced training or training courses in the past year, are you satisfied with the training program (course content, lectures, material)? |
1. Yes |
36. If you have completed advanced training or training courses in the past year, did the training program correspond to your field of work? |
1. Yes |
37. If you have completed advanced training or training courses in the past year, have you used the knowledge and skills you have gained in your work? |
1. Yes |
38. What positive changes in your opinion have taken place in the civil service in recent years? | Enter your answer |
39. What negative changes in your opinion have taken place in the civil service in recent years? | Enter your answer |
40. If possible, what would you change in your work/state body or civil service? | Enter your answer |
41. What workflow improvements have the administration made over the past year? ( You can select several options) | Enter your answer |
42. If there is a conflict, will you contact the ethics commissioner? |
1. Yes |
Information about the respondent | |
| Appendix 11 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
THE ACT OF RECONCILIATION
based on the results of rechecking the data contained in the reporting information
___________________________________________________________________
(name of CSB/LEB)
____________________
(reporting period)
№ | Name | Deductible points |
1 | Submitting/placing incomplete information | |
2 | Submitting/placing of unreliable information | |
3 | Timeliness of accounting information | |
4 | Lack of reporting information | |
TOTAL: | ||
1. Incomplete information is submitted/placed, including the absence of following elements (appendices, sections, tables, indicator values, etc.) that are provided for by the established requirements for the structure of reporting information, in particular:
1) _______________________________
2) _______________________________
The deduction is: _ _ _ points.
2. Unreliable information is submitted/placed. The following inconsistencies of the facts were found during re-checking:
1) ___________________________________________________________
2) ___________________________________________________________
The deduction is: _ _ _ _ _ points.
3.According to the assessment Schedule, the deadline for submission/ placement of reporting information by the state body:
"____" ____________ 20 ___ year
Actual date of reporting information submission: "___" ______ 20 ___ year
4. Reporting information of the assessed state body: yes/no (underline).
The deduction is: _ _ _ _ _ points.
Final deduction: _ _ _ _ _ points.
Representative of the body authorized for assessment, position
____________ _______________ _________________________________________
(date) (signature) (print full name)
The representative of assessed state body, posittion
____________ _______________ _________________________________________
(date) (signature) (print full name)
| Appendix 12 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Conclusion on the results of evaluating the effectiveness of the state body activity in the
direction "Personnel management" of the block
“Organizational development of a state body”
_____________________________________________________________________________
(name of CSB/LEB)
_______________
(reporting period)
№ п/п | Assessment criteria | Points |
1 | Personnel potential of a state body | |
2 | Labor rationing | |
3 | Meritocracy and organizational culture | |
Deduction of points | ||
Overall assessment: | ||
Analysis of the activity effectiveness of the CSB /LEB in the direction “Personnel management”:
Conclusions and recommendations:
__________________________________________________________________
Head of a state body / relevant department of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan
_______________ ___________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____" ______________ 20 ___ year
Head of the relevant structural division of the body authorized for assessment/ relevant structural division of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan
_______________ __________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____" ______________ 20 ___ year
| Appendix 13 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Exit interview with dismissed civil servants
1. What is the reason for your dismissal ?
a) transfer to the quasi-public sector
b) work in the private sector
c) going to work of the main employee
d) moving
e) state of health (illness)
f) another option____________________________________________
2. What was the main reason for your dismissal?
a) lack of career prospects
b) dissatisfaction with the current social package
c) high workload
d) the desire to change the field of activity
e) harassment by management
e) lack of opportunities for professional development
g) low salary
h) another option____________________________________________
3. Work experience in this state body:
a) less than a year
c) from 3 to 5 years
d) from 5 to 10 years
e) from 10 to 15 years
f) from 15 to 20 years
е) от 15 – до 20 лет
g) more than 20 years
4. Gender:
a) male
5. Is your position executive?
a) YES
6. Did the work meet your goals and expectations?
a) YES
7. Have you seen the prospects of career growth at work?
a) YES
8. How often did you stay late at work and work on weekends?
a) no, this was not the case, if involved in overtime work, then only by the written order of the administration
b) several times a month
c) several times a week
d) stayed at work daily and worked (a) on weekends
9. When working on weekends, were you given another day off or were you paid in accordance with the Labor law?
a) YES
10. Do you think that the work in your structural division is evenly distributed among the employees?
a) YES
11. Have you been assigned work that goes beyond your functional responsibilities?
a) YES
12. Were you informed by the office of personnel management about the possibility of completing this questionnaire?
a) YES
Explanation for filling out the form “Exit interview with dismissed civil servants”
1. The task of the exit interview is to identify the main reasons for the departure of civil servants from the civil service system at their own will.
2. The personnel management service (HR service) informs the civil servants about the necessity to pass an interview in case of dismissal.
3. The exit interview is completed by a civil servant who is being dismissed from the civil service, in the form according to the Appendix to this Methodology, starting from January 1, 2019.
When choosing the answer "other option" to questions 1 and 2, specify the reason for dismissal.
4. The completed exit interview is automatically sent to the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-corruption Agency or its territorial divisions and is of confidential nature.
5. The form for completing the exit interview is uploaded automatically when a civil servant launches a dismissal application in the Integrated information system "E-kyzmet" (hereinafter IIS "E-kyzmet").
6. Questionnaires in the "E-kyzmet" IIS are located in the "Questionnaire" subsection of the "Processes" section at the following addresses: http://10.61.42.73/ekyzmet-ui/jsp/login.jsp either http://10.245.12.73/ekyzmet-ui/jsp/login.jsp.
7. In state bodies that are not integrated into the IIS "E-kyzmet" , the survey of the dismissed civil servants is conducted through the Intranet-portal of state bodies at the address: ipgo.kz (section "Questionnaire/Social survey").
At the end of the exit interview in the specified section, the civil servant must print a notification about completion of the exit interview for submission to the personnel management service (HR service).
| Appendix 14 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" |
Criteria and indicators for assessing the activity effectiveness of a state body in the direction
"Personnel management" of the block “Organizational development of a state body”
№ п\п | Name of the criterion / indicator | Points |
1 | Personnel potential of a state body | 30 |
1.1 | Net turnover of the personnel | 10 |
1.2 | Stability of the personnel | 5 |
1.3 | Turnover for the first time taken employees | 5 |
1.5 | Exit interview | 5 |
1.6 | Gender composition | 5 |
1.7 | Substitution of vacant administrative public positions of the corpus "A" (penalty indicator) | 1,5 |
2 | Labour organization | 30 |
2.1 | Labor rationing | 15 |
2.2 | Satisfaction with working conditions | 5 |
2.3 | Management practices in a state body | 5 |
2.4 | Training of civil servants | 5 |
2.5 | Strategic HR planning (bonus indicator) | 1,5 |
2.6 | Using the "E-kyzmet" system (bonus indicator) | 1,5 |
3 | Meritocracy and organizational culture | 40 |
3.1 | Transparency of competitive procedures | 10 |
3.2 | Compliance with meritocracy | 10 |
3.3 | Career growth | 10 |
3.4 | Transparency of encouragements in a state body | 5 |
3.5 | Ethics and relationships in the team | 5 |
3.6 |
The level of languages knowledge (bonus indicator) | 1,5 |
| Appendix 15 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Conclusion on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of a state body in the
direction "Application of information technologies" of the block
“Organizational development of a state body”
______________________________________________________________________________
(name of CSB/LEB)
_______________
(reporting period)
№ п/п | Evaluation critera | Points |
1 | Filling of the architectural portal | |
2 | Functional performance of information systems | |
3 | Efficiency of information systems of state bodies | |
4 | Automation of functions of state bodies | |
5 | Using the Intranet-portal of state bodies | |
Deduction of points | ||
Overall assessment: | ||
Analysis of the activity effectiveness of the CSB /LEB in the direction “Application of information technologies”:
Conclusions and recommendations:
__________________________________________________________________
Head of a state body / relevant department of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan
________________ _________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____" ______________ 20 ___ year
Head of the relevant structural division of the body authorized for assessment/ relevant structural division of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan
________________ __________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____" ______________ 20 ___ year
| Appendix 16 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block |
|
| "Organizational development of a state body" |
Criteria and indicators for assessing the activity effectiveness of a state body in the direction
"Application of information technologies" of the block “Organizational development
of a state body”
№ п\п | Name of the criterion / indicator | Points |
1 | Filling of the architectural portal | 30 |
2 | Functional performance of information systems | 20 |
3 | Efficiency of information systems of state bodies | 20 |
4 | Automation of functions of state bodies | 20 |
5 | Using the Intranet-portal of state bodies | 10 |
| Appendix 17 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Conclusion on the results of assessment of the activity effectiveness of a state body in the block
“Organizational development of a state body”
__________________________________________________________________
(name of CSB/LEB)
________________
(reporting period)
№ п/п | Direction of assessment | Points |
1 | ||
2 | ||
Overall assessment: | ||
Analysis of the activity effectiveness of the CSB /LEB in the directions of assessment:
1. In the direction "Personnel management".
2. In the direction "Application of information technologies".
Conclusions and recommendations:
__________________________________________________________________
Head of a state body
_____________ ____________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
Head of the relevant structural division of a state body
______________ ___________________________________________________________
(signature) (print full name)
"____"______________20___year
| Appendix 18 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" form |
Table of disagreements on the results of the assessment in the
direction _________________________________________________
(assessed state body)
№ | Conclusion of the body authorized for assessment | Objection of the assessed state body | Decision based on the results of appeal (accepted/rejected) | Note (justification for accepting/rejecting the objection) |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Conclusions:
By criterion 1:_____.
By criterion 2:_____.
The total score, taking into account the results of the appeal, was _____.
Chairman of the Commission, position
______________ _________________ _________________________________________
(date) (signature) ( surname, name, patronymic (if any)
Familiarized with the results of the appeal:
The representative of a state body, position
______________ ________________ __________________________________________
(date) (signature) (surname, name, patronymic (if any)
| Appendix 19 to the Methodology for assessing the effectiveness of state bodies activity in the block "Organizational development of a state body" |
List of normative and technical documentation:
1. Technical specification;
2. Program description;
3. User manual;
4. Administrator's guide;
5. Testing program and methodology;
6. Information security policy;
7. The act of putting into operation (if any);
8. The act of commissioning (if any).
