Evaluation of the Regional Public Authorities’ Activities: Key Theoretical and Practical Aspects

Abstract

Activity of public administration is one of the most evaluated aspects involving hundreds of stakeholders across Ukraine. It is an important topic, as evaluation is one of the main ways for collection of the useful evidence for policymaking. Evaluation can be defined as the collection of evidence for formulating a judgement on the merits of an intervention, programme or policy. There is an unsolved task to provide an in-depth analysis with up-to-date information on the role of the evaluation of regional public authorities and local self-government institutions’ activities. The article shows a number of evaluation methods for the public authorities’ activities and reveals the factors that explain the current situation. The authors propose indicators that meet current trends, in particular the concept of sustainable development, within which the world community is moving. The system of balanced indicators allows to link strategic goals and key indicators that measure the degree of their achievement in the regions. The formation of a perfect evaluation system for the public authorities’ activities includes monitoring of the obtained results, their comparison with the forecast and plan under the condition of clearly defined costs in advance. This involves the use of a set of indicators, in particular: indicators that characterize economic and financial sustainability, those which assess institutional development, social transformation, environmental responsibility and energy efficiency. The influence of the public opinion makes any management process more or less public, so it is necessary to intensify the process of the public monitoring of the services provided by the public authorities, with further response or accumulation of the information for further consideration.

The operational steps of the evaluation processes: a balance of the literature

“…The term collection is observed in the literature review less frequently than the other terms but still expressively (Rodrigues, 2019;Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021;Selly, 2021). In the view in question, the collection is understood as collecting and gathering data, information, and knowledge for examination and analysis.…”

“…Thus, the primary grouping of evaluation attributes is what brings the idea of decision. This group includes the terms diagnosis (Ferreira Neto, 2021), relevance (Diniz, 2020;Almeida, 2018;Oliveira et al, 2018;Costa, 2020), decision making (Diniz, 2020;Eulálio, 2019;Almeida, 2018;Oliveira et al, 2018;Trindade, 2018;Rodrigues, 2019;Francisco, 2018;Selly, 2021; Research, Society and Development, v. 11, n. 12, e362111234288, 2022 (CC BY 4.0) | ISSN 2525-3409 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i12.34288 Acampa et al, 2021), background ; decision (Francisco, 2018;Biodun, 2021)), plan (Hasibuan et al, 2021), conclusion (Hasibuan et al, 2021), filing (Eulálio, 2019), judgment (Campinhos, 2019;Trindade, 2018;Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021;Masa et al, 2021), guidance (Ferreira Neto, 2021), choice (Acampa et al, 2021), rational , establishment (Santos, 2019), criterion (Almeida, 2018 ), evidence (Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021). Among these terms, the most frequent is decision-making.…”

“…The act of evaluating deals with the idea of action. These actions concern activity (Diniz, 2020;Almeida, 2018;Oliveira al., 2018), construction (Campinhos, 2019), action (Campinhos, 2019;Muthmainnah et al, 2021), operation , formulation (Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021), intervention (Campinhos, 2019;Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021;Nweke, 2021;Damiola, 2020), service , capacity (Ambroise, 2020), organization (Acampa et al, 2021), program Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021;Damiola, 2020;Selly, 2021), policy (Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021) and compliance (Selly, 2021). It means that to assess is to act in search of the result that one intends to achieve, which, in this case, is to find its value.…”

“…They were grouped according to their meanings and the ideas they conveyed. They are: continuous (Ferreira Neto, 2021) and process (Francisco, 2018), which give an idea of continuity; improvement (Ambroise, 2020); change (Ambroise, 2020); improvement (Francisco, 2018), which demonstrate a concept of improvement; object (Eulálio, 2019;Santos & Rocha, 2018); device (Campinhos, 2019); component (Campinhos, 2019); merit (Santos & Rocha, 2018;Trindade, 2018;Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021;Boutabssil, 2021); instrument (Hasibuan et al, 2021); element (Masa et al, 2021); actor (Campinhos, 2019;Acampa et al, 2021); technology , which convey an idea of medium, mode; difficulty (Ferreira Neto, 2021); failure (Ferreira Neto, 2021), which connote impediment; systematic (Diniz, 2020;Almeida, 2018;Oliveira et al, 2018;Rodrigues, 2019;Nweke, 2021;Boutabssil, 2021); methodological procedure (Diniz, 2020;Almeida, 2018); technical (Trindade, 2018), which conveys the idea of method; managerial (GOMES, 2019); administrative (Trindade, 2018); political (Trindade, 2018); status (Hasibuan et al, 2021); position (Campinhos, 2019); meaning (Yörük, 2021), which convey the idea of conformation; and valid (Campinhos, 2019); legitimate (Campinhos, 2019); and accountability (Francisco, 2018,) tha...…”

Evaluation of the Rami 4.0 architecture course offered by the campus Manaus District Industrial of IFAM

“…The evaluation takes, for example, the number of expected participants who will complete training and compares it with the number of participants who completed the course. The result of any evaluation is not a number but a value judgment based on the comparison (Honcharenko & Honcharenko, 2021): achieved or not achieved, satisfactory or unsatisfactory, conforming or not conforming, in short, yes or no. Naturally, this value judgment cannot be made in any way; there must be specific criteria for it (Praja & Yudha, 2021).…”