An Outline of Comprehensive Plan for Performance Improvement in Public Prosecution Department

We have already seen in the article “KPIs for Public Prosecution Department” that standardized and quantifiable parameters are required to assess uniformly performance of the prosecutors so that improved service delivery, effective career planning, transparency and appropriate decision making may be inducted in the administrative set up. These key performance indicators, actually, may be made a basis of a comprehensive plan for performance improvement in Public  Prosecution Department. 

On the basis of these KPIs, such a performance assessment and performance improvement system may be devised which, not only, would identify deficiencies in the performance of prosecutors,  but also undertake necessary measures to remove such deficiencies through administrative measures and  training programmes aiming at removing such deficiencies. For the purpose, data of criminal cases in terms of each stage of prosecution  (e.g. investigation level; remand level; evidence level; bail level; argumentation level etc.)  would be collected. In this way data relating to prosecution timeline would be available and the department would be enabled to analyze performance of prosecutors and the causes of delay at each stage of prosecution and to remove such causes through administrative measures and training programs, if necessary. 

The proposed performance assessment and performance improvement system may also fix benchmarks of performance and fix performance targets for prosecutors, keeping in view such performance benchmarks so that service delivery may be improved.  Moreover, promotion prospects of prosecutors would also be linked with their performance viz a viz fixed performance benchmarks so that it may be ensured that only higher performance is rewarded. In this way it would be ensured that only the prosecutors showing higher performance are promoted. In other words, the higher we go, the better performing stuff would be found in the Prosecution Department. Such a scenario also warrants attractive salary packages to be offered to the prosecutors so that better talent may be retained in the department. In short, the objectives of proposed KPIs may be summarized as given below: 
1. To induct a standardized procedure of inspection and reporting for performance assessment uniformly;
2. To link inspection reporting systems with standardized assessment of training needs;
3. To link reporting system with structuring proper training programs;
4. To link inspection reporting system with standardized procedure of inquiry initiation;
5. To link inspection reporting system with progressive performance improvement system through assigning performance targets;
6. To link reporting system with career planning and promotion policy;
7. To make inspection  reporting system a tool for taking appropriate policy decisions.