1. Core Mandate and Function
   
   The Departmental Review Commission will:

• Conduct routine and independent performance reviews of all ministries, departments and government-funded projects.
• Require quarterly performance and financial reports from all public agencies.
• Conduct on-the-ground assessments of key national programs to verify progress and outcomes.
• Evaluate the alignment between departmental activities and national development goals.
• Identify waste, inefficiency, duplication of functions, or mismanagement of public funds.
• Make strategic recommendations to the Office of the President and the National Assembly for corrective action, policy refinement or reallocation of resources.

   

2. Organizational Structure
   
   The Commission will operate as an independent oversight body under the Office of the President but governed by its own Board of Commissioners. It will be led by a Chief Review Commissioner supported by a team of sector specialists and auditors in the following units:

• Health, Education & Social Services Unit
• Infrastructure & Transportation Unit
• Agriculture & Natural Resources Unit
• Finance & Economic Planning Unit
• Energy, Utilities & Environment Unit
• Public Administration & Governance Unit

Each unit will be staffed with policy analysts, monitoring and evaluation experts, public finance specialists and legal advisors. Field teams will also be deployed to monitor regional performance in all Local Government Areas (LGAs).

3. Reporting and Review Process
   
   The DRC will develop a standardized Quarterly Reporting Template that each ministry and department must complete. This template will include:

• Progress toward key performance indicators (KPIs)
• Budget utilization summaries and variance explanations
• Description of obstacles or challenges encountered
• Staff deployment and service delivery metrics
• Citizen feedback mechanisms and grievance redress status
  
  Upon submission, the Commission will:
• Analyze data trends and compare performance to projected goals
• Schedule review meetings with department heads
• Publish summary findings in a bi-annual Public Sector Performance Report
• Recommend actions including reforms, sanctions, project adjustments or funding reallocation
  
  

4. Evaluation Criteria
   
   Departments and programs will be assessed on the basis of:

• Efficiency: Are resources being used optimally?
• Effectiveness: Are objectives being achieved?
• Relevance: Is the work aligned with national needs and priorities?
• Transparency: Is there evidence of open processes and reporting?
• Impact: Is there measurable improvement in the target community or sector?
  
  

5. Integration with National Planning
   
   The findings and data from the DRC will directly influence:

• National budget allocation decisions
• Presidential planning and development strategy
• Civil service promotions or disciplinary actions
• Identification of high-performing departments for recognition and replication of best practices
  
  

6. Legal Backing and Enforcement
   
   The Commission will be established through an Act of the National Assembly. This legislation will:

• Grant the DRC full authority to request documentation and conduct inspections
• Empower the Commission to summon government officers who fail to comply with reporting obligations
• Define penalties for misreporting or repeated underperformance
• Provide protection for whistleblowers and ensure transparency in reporting
  
  

7. Use of Technology
   
   To streamline monitoring and reduce manual reporting inefficiencies, the DRC will;

• Create a Digital Performance Dashboard to track and display real-time program data
• Use mobile reporting tools for field officers
• Integrate Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for location-based project tracking
• Apply data analytics to detect irregularities in spending or resource deployment
  
  

8. Capacity Building and Support

• All departments will be supported in setting up internal monitoring and evaluation (M&E) units to assist in data collection and reporting.
• Regular training and workshops will be conducted to build a culture of performance management.
  
  

9. Anticipated Impact

• Improved service delivery as underperforming units are identified and restructured.
• Better use of government funds through early detection of misallocation or project failure.
• Higher citizen confidence in public institutions through visible accountability mechanisms.
• Professionalization of the civil service through merit-based assessments and performance-linked reforms.
• Reduction in corruption and mismanagement, as transparent monitoring leaves less room for abuse.