United Nations Public Service Awards Case Studies

The Singapore Government aims to make Singapore the best home for all citizens – a competitive economy where citizens can prosper and an inclusive society where no one is left behind. In recent years, Singapore, like many countries, has faced the challenge of managing globalization – driving economic growth in a small and highly open economy while coping with the pressures from a widening income gap and an ageing population.

The Singapore Government is committed to ensuring that all citizens benefit from the fruits of the nation’s success, without having unsustainable welfare schemes that would sap the work ethic. Hence, it shares budget surpluses with citizens in a way that tilts the balance towards the lower income and helps them progress together with society.

In 2006, the Government introduced two new innovative ideas: the first ever consolidated surplus sharing scheme for Singaporeans – the Progress Package, and the first ever scheme specifically to reward older low wage Singaporeans for working – the Workfare Bonus Scheme, which was integrated into the Progress Package. The Progress Package has 6 schemes to target different groups, so that all citizens get something in the package:

• Workfare Bonus Scheme, to reward older low-wage workers for their work ethic (see Table 1);
• Growth Dividends, to share the fruits of our nation’s growth with all Singaporeans (see Table 2);
• Utilities, Service & Conservancy Charges and Rental Rebates to help lower-income households with the cost of living;
• Top-ups to the Central Provident Fund Accounts to help the elderly meet their retirement and healthcare needs;
• Opportunity Funds to Schools to invest in the education of the next generation; and
• 40th Anniversary National Service Bonus to recognize the contributions of our National Service Men.

The Progress Package exhibited a high degree of inter-agency collaboration in Singapore’s public service. While the six schemes originated from different government agencies, an integrated government effort was made to have consistent eligibility criteria, allotment criteria and sign-up procedures. It simplified the citizen-government transaction as Singaporeans would only have to interact with one interface to benefit from the various schemes. In so doing, it allowed the Government to achieve a quantum leap in delivery and outreach to citizens.

The Workfare Bonus Scheme rewarded low-wage workers for regular and productive work and represented part of the Government’s response to the problem of the increasing income divide arising from globalization. This scheme applied innovative policies and processes to challenge the belief that government distributions would erode the work ethic and encourage a dependency mindset amongst beneficiaries.

Table 1: Workfare Bonus paid according to average monthly income
Average monthly salary of S$400 and below: 1.5 months salary or S$75, whichever is higher, to be paid out on 1 May 2006 and 1 May 2007
Above S$400 - S$900 monthly salary: S$600
Above S$900 - S$1,200 monthly salary: S$400
Above S$1,200 - S$1,500 monthly salary: S$200

Table 1 – Structure of Growth Dividends
Annual Value (AV) of home S$6,000 or less
- Annual Income (AI) of S$24,000 or less: S$800; AI of more than $24,000: S$600
AV of home between S$6,000 and S$10,000
- AI of S$24,000 or less: S$600; AI of more than $24,000: S$400
AV of home more than S$10,000: S$200

What is the initiative about? (the solution)
The Progress Package and Workfare Bonus Scheme represent a paradigm shift in policy objective, structure and delivery to citizens. The 4 key achievements are: “Policy” – A New Concept of Surplus Sharing: A new three-tiered allotment criteria that accounts for income, wealth and age of a person was designed to better target the distribution of monies so that older and poorer Singaporeans would receive more compared to previous surplus sharing schemes. Also, for the first time, we rolled out a surplus sharing scheme that rewards regular and productive work. “Product” – A Transformation of Administration: The Progress Package consolidated six different schemes into one umbrella package through harmonizing eligibility criteria, sign-up processes and providing a common government touch point (website, email address and phone line). Almost all eligible beneficiaries were determined automatically from Government administrative records, for greater convenience to beneficiaries. “Service Delivery” – A Socially Inclusive and Equitable Outreach to Vulnerable Groups: The citizen-government transaction was simplified to increase the reach of the surplus sharing exercise to the populace, especially vulnerable Singaporeans. Eligibility requirements that proved to be barriers to entry in previous surplus sharing exercises were removed, e.g. required cash contributions to individual pension accounts. Outreach programmes were designed for groups who were expected to be less aware of the Progress Package, e.g. the elderly and illiterate. “Public Accountability” – A Fair and Transparent Appeals Process: To ensure fairness in treatment and clear public accountability, the government devised and documented detailed appeal guidelines to process public appeals. Service centres across the island were established to handle on-the-spot cases. Impact of the Progress Package The impact of the Progress Package has been excellent. Sign ups began on 1 April 2006 and: • Within 3 days, the sign-up rate hit 50.3% of the eligible population. • By the first month, 94% of all eligible Singaporeans had already signed up for the package, far exceeding the initial target of 90%. • Towards the end of the exercise in December 2006, 97% of all eligible Singaporeans have signed up, translating to more than S$2 billion being disbursed accurately and expeditiously to the intended beneficiaries. The Progress Package has also encouraged wealthier Singaporeans to help less well-off members of society as they have donated about S$1 million to various charities through an online donation portal. The Workfare Bonus in particular was successful in reaching out to the targeted group of low-income Singaporeans, about a third of whom were informal workers. Based on statistical surveys prior to the exercise, the Government had estimated that between 319,000 and 397,000 people could benefit from the Workfare Bonus. At the close of the exercise, about 339,000 beneficiaries had received more than S$150 million, each of whom improved their incomes by up to 12.5% for 2006. In all, the Progress Package and Workfare Bonus Scheme reaped numerous intangible social benefits. Positive feedback from the general public, media and community grassroots leaders showed the public’s awareness and understanding of the policies such as workfare, high satisfaction with the significantly enhanced delivery of services and approval of the increased outreach to vulnerable groups of Singaporeans.

Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
February 2006: Announcement of Progress Package in Singapore Budget 2006 Late March 2006: Notification letters sent out to 2.3m Singaporeans 1 April 2006: Sign up for Progress Package begins. 1 May 2006: 94% of Singaporeans sign up for Progress Package. First payment of Progress Package made. 31 December 2006: Last date for sign-up. About 97% of Singaporeans have signed up for their Progress Package

Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
a. What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
In the last 40 years, Singapore has enjoyed prosperity and economic growth. This has enabled our citizens to command good wages and achieve a high standard of living. However, like many other nations in the globalised economy, our competitive advantages are increasingly coming under stiff competition posed by lower-cost workers from developing economies that have entered the global workforce. The pressures of globalization and the challenges of an ageing population have resulted in a widening income gap. In particular, older, less educated and low wage Singaporean workers face the risk of wage deflation and structural unemployment. The government must thus continue to drive economic growth in a small and highly open economy while finding creative ways to promote equity and help low wage and vulnerable Singaporeans progress together with the rest of society. A key strategy is to share budget surpluses with citizens in a way that tilts the balance towards the lower income, but without undermining the factors that have contributed to Singapore’s competitiveness, particularly the work ethic. Although the government has had some surplus sharing exercises in the past, these were usually made up of separate programmes with different policy objectives, allotment criteria and sign-up procedures. Citizens had to initiate separate transactions, remember different deadlines and provide duplicate sets of information to benefit from the schemes. Qualification for many of these schemes was also contingent on citizens making cash contributions to their individual pension accounts i.e. the Central Provident Fund account, which led to many lower-income Singaporeans missing out on the schemes. Previous schemes were also less targeted in terms of their allotment of monies to Singaporeans. Allotments tended to depend on single-dimensional proxies of wealth, e.g. the rental value of one’s place of residence, leading to a rather crude assessment of one’s financial situation. From this, the Government received feedback that we should have a more refined means-test to better benefit lower income Singaporeans.

b. What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
In view of the problems in the previous schemes, the Government set out to fundamentally re-design the surplus sharing initiative in a way that would address and redefine the way monies are to be shared with citizens. Our priorities were to: (i) introduce a new concept of surplus sharing: one that rewards work, promotes equity and ensures that lower-income Singaporeans receive more from the exercise, (ii) transform administration: simplify the sign-up process and find a more efficient means of distributing monies to Singaporeans, (iii) promote social inclusion and equity: provide targeted help to vulnerable Singaporeans so that they would be able to sign-up for their benefits and (iv) promote accountability: provide appeal channels for Singaporeans.

c. What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
The Government adopted a four-pronged strategy of value creation in policy, product, service delivery and accountability. (a) “Policy”: A New Concept of Surplus Sharing: More for the Lower Income, More for Those Who Work First, a new set of allotment criteria was developed for the Progress Package that would be relatively simple to administer and yet sufficiently targeted to provide more benefits for the lower-income. We introduced a new two-tiered structure of Annual Income (AI) and Annual Value (AV) for assessing one’s means. The AI establishes an individual's income, while the AV of his property is a proxy for wealth. (see Table 1). Second, we designed a scheme that would reward low-wage workers for work – the Workfare Bonus Scheme. Instead of the common notion of welfare transfer payments, the Workfare Bonus emphasized ‘helping citizens help themselves’ and thus offered a new redistributive solution for Singapore in tackling the widening income problem. It achieved a redistributive effect while encouraging workers to work and upgrade themselves to meet the demands of a globalised economy. Needy recipients benefited immediately as 90% of the Workfare Bonus was paid out in cash, with the remaining 10% paid into individual healthcare accounts as savings for future healthcare needs. As the Workfare Bonus targeted elderly low-wage workers, only Singaporeans aged 40 and above, who earned an average monthly income of S$1,500 or less and had worked for at least 6 months qualified (see Table 2). (b) “Product”: A Transformation of Administration from Six Schemes into One Package and One Government The Government transformed the administration of the Progress Package to make it easier and faster for citizens, representing a major milestone in the Government’s efforts to work together to become “one-government” for citizen-government transactions. Singaporeans only interacted with one Government agency (the Central Provident Fund Board or CPFB) to benefit from all the schemes. Each citizen received: • A single notification letter listing all his benefits under the various programmes. • A single sign-up application through one interface. • A single sum credited into the bank account of his choice or a cheque. (c) “Service”: A Socially Inclusive and Equitable Outreach to All Singaporeans The Government devised targeted outreach programmes so that no Singaporean would miss out on the scheme • We established service counters island wide at all 105 Community Centres and 5 Community Development Councils to help informal workers who did not have formal employment records, declare their income for the Workfare Bonus Scheme, and to help Singaporeans sign up for the Progress Package. • We worked with community grassroots leaders to reach out to poorer Singaporeans living in small rental flats; • We worked with staff from nursing homes/senior citizens’ homes and prisons, as well as charitable organization, to facilitate sign ups for vulnerable groups such as the elderly, prisoners, lower income and disabled. (d) “Public Accountability”: A Fair and Transparent Appeals Process To ensure that feedback and appeals were handled in a fair and timely manner, the Government established a set of appeal guidelines covering a comprehensive set of categories. Replies to FAQs and service standards for government replies were posted on the website to provide transparency and accountability.

d. What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
The success of the Progress Package was overwhelming. Our efforts at improving service delivery and increasing public accountability resulted in a sign-up rate that far exceeded the Government’s initial target of 90%. Sign ups began on 1 April 2006 and: • Within 3 days, over 1 million Singaporeans or 50.3% of eligible citizens had signed up for the Package (over 1 million citizens); • By the first month, 2.14 million Singaporeans, or 94% of all eligible citizens, had already signed up for the package, exceeding the initial target of 90%. • Towards the end of the exercise in December 2006, 2.2m or 97% of all eligible Singaporeans have signed up. This translates to more than S$2 billion being disbursed accurately and expeditiously to the intended beneficiaries. The Progress Package also enabled the Government to embark on a new mode of e-service delivery, improving our means of public administration. Although 3 forms of sign-up options were available (ATMs, the Internet and hard copy forms), we extensively pushed for e-sign ups through the ATMs and the Internet. As a result, nearly 90% of Singaporeans who signed up did so electronically and were able to get their package within a service standard of 4 working days in a completely paperless exercise. The Progress Package has had a positive and immediate impact on the lives of Singaporeans, by promoting equity and social inclusion. This is evident through the positive coverage of the Progress Package and the numerous articles published in the mass media. In terms of the sign-up process, the public appreciated the service points at Community Centres/Community Development Councils and CPF Service Centres. More than 600,000 people have visited these thus far. In a public survey conducted by CPFB, 90% of respondents felt that it was “Very Easy” or “Easy” to get help on their queries at CCs/CDCs or through direct contact with CPF Board and Website. Singaporeans were also very impressed with the administration, delivery and accountability that the Government offered throughout the entire Progress Package exercise. In response to a public survey conducted by CPFB, a majority of survey respondents (68%) rated CPFB’s overall services in administering the Progress Package as “Good” or “Excellent”, with another 31% rating it as “Satisfactory”. CPFB has also received numerous compliments from the public for the successful implementation of the Progress Package and the efficiency with which the service has been delivered.

Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
It took several months of extensive collaboration across various agencies to ascertain if a consolidation of schemes was possible, and once that was established, to fully address the concerns of the various agencies and finalise the details of the Progress Package. Foremost in our minds during the design process was efficiency, equity and accuracy. Eventually, we were able to produce one single notification letter, one website, one common sign-up deadline, one allotment system and one citizen-government transaction for the different schemes in the Progress Package. This has revolutionized the way the Government typically transacts with citizens for surplus sharing initiatives, reduced potential wastage, generated public sector efficiencies and established new inter-agency collaboration platforms. The Progress Package has thus become the model to follow for future surplus sharing efforts and even other government delivery mechanisms for its ability to deliver multi-agency schemes through a single channel. In terms of the policy thinking behind allotment, the new three-tiered allotment system of the Progress Package has provided the Government with a simple and intuitive set of criteria for future schemes. The three-tiered structure is flexible and allows the AI and AV cut-offs to be modified depending on prevailing policy objectives and demographic changes. This is especially important in future sharing of budget surpluses with citizens. The Workfare Bonus Scheme has allowed the new idea of improving income distribution by large scale wage supplementation to be tested without the risk of the Government committing to a potentially expensive permanent programme. The second payment for the scheme in 2007 will provide additional data for the Government to decide how such future schemes could be scoped.

What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
First, in designing a good and sustainable means-testing framework, the degree of targeting of the scheme should always be balanced with the costs of administration and the practicality of obtaining the relevant allotment data. In determining the wealth of a Singaporean for example, a line must be drawn as to how finely and definitively the scheme can approximate one’s wealth. Generally, a tiered system of AV, AI and age provides an adequate and fair assessment of one’s wealth, without being too complicated to administer. Although there were calls for the Government to better determine one’s exact wealth (e.g. including each individual’s savings, private wealth, insurance etc) would be a far too complex, intrusive and expensive exercise. Second, we learnt that it is possible to conduct a sign-up scheme which requires the entire population of Singaporeans to transact with the Government, as long as the operational risks are well managed. For instance, ATM sign-up processes should be kept consistent across all banks and the internet sign ups should be as simple as possible to minimize the possibility of system crashes, while hard copy sign up forms must be kept simple with just the minimal amount of information necessary to direct the sign up. Third, targeted outreach programmes are crucial in order to reach out to as many segments of the citizen population as possible. The collaboration with community grassroots, nursing homes, charitable organisations and prisons was key to achieving the high sign-up rate of 97%. The Government should engage these organizations at an early stage in the system design to encourage buy-in and provide sufficient time for organization of volunteers and sign up efforts. Fourth, we had deliberately positioned the Workfare Bonus Scheme as a temporary scheme as we were cautious that there could be unintended consequences such as effects on the work ethic or fraudulent claims. We have learned that this caution was warranted. For example, while the number of beneficiaries was within expectations, there were aspects about the labour market particularly with regards to the wages of informal workers that were different from what we had expected. Finally, we learnt that it is always easy to adopt old ways of doing things, especially when such ways are tried, tested and proven. However, there is great value in challenging assumptions and devising novel ways of delivering the same service. Regular consultation is necessary to ensure the interests of the various agencies are aligned and processes are common, but yet inclusive of the requirements of each policy scheme. Time and effort must be taken to ensure that all the agencies understand and subscribe to the value proposition of the Progress Package as a positive innovation This is the only way the innovations developed can be sustainable and transferable to future schemes.


Institution Name:		Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Manpower and Central Provident Fund Board, Singapore
Institution Type:		Government Agency
Contact Person:		Su Mei Ho
Title:		Policy Analyst (Social Programmes)
Telephone/ Fax:		63327424
Institution's / Project's Website:		63327435
E-mail:		ho_su_mei@mof.gov.sg
Address:		#10-01 The Treasury High Street
Postal Code:		179434
City:		Singapore
State/Province:
Country:		Singapore

The Problem

Solution and Key Benefits

Actors and Stakeholders

(a) Strategies

(b) Implementation

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

(d) Use of Resources

Sustainability and Transferability

Lessons Learned

Contact Information