PREM Notes

176 items available

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/10986/9424

This note series is intended to summarize good practices and key policy findings on poverty reduction and economic management (PREM) topics.

Items in this collection

Now showing 1 - 10 of 20

Building Monitoring and Evaluation Capacity in the Republic of Yemen

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-03) Ivins, Ingrid ; Hwang, Helena

This note disseminates key lessons learned from the World Bank financed project in the Republic of Yemen, monitoring and evaluation of the poverty reduction strategy paper and reform programs, which established and operationalized a poverty reduction strategy monitoring unit. The approaches used, such as a study tour to Uganda, focused international training sessions, and the successful work on improving and minimizing the number of indicators, provide some lessons learned for other countries seeking to build monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity. Policy makers learned from Uganda s good practices of connecting accountability with resource allocation and of the importance of a strong and independent statistics office. The Republic of Yemen s experience also illustrates the value of having a powerful M&E champion to support such a significant initiative. Finally, the inclusion of civil society organizations in the planning process and in M&E outputs, especially on the central level and on policy matters, increased popular support and was an important factor in building M&E capacity.
Using M&E to Support Performance Based Planning and Budgeting in Indonesia

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-11) Ahern, Mark ; Beard, Victoria A. ; Gueorguieva, Anna I. ; Sri Handini, Retno

Since 2000, there has been growing interest in reforming Indonesia s budgeting systems to promote a more performance-orientated process. Indonesia is in the initial stages of this reform. A major challenge is determining the information needs of the central coordinating ministries. To date, these ministries have taken separate paths, developing their own monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems, which are not linked to the planning and budgeting system, and creating new regulations and institutions to manage them. The result has been underused information and a high reporting burden at all levels. Furthermore, the current system places a greater emphasis on monitoring rather than evaluation. In 2011, representatives from the coordinating ministries participated in a series of high-level round table discussions to identify the steps needed to rationalize and coordinate M&E practices across institutions and to strengthen the links among data collection, evaluation, planning and budgeting. The round table process has confirmed that, while coordination is needed, establishing incentives for the demand and use of M&E information is critical to making the systems effective. This note identifies priority areas for future action building on this finding.
Chile's Monitoring and Evaluation System, 1994-2010

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-08) Dussauge Laguna, Mauricio I.

The Chilean Management Control and Evaluation System (Sistema de Evaluacion y Control de Gestion) is internationally regarded as a successful example of how to put into place a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. Chilean M&E tools are the product of both cross-national lesson-drawing, and national policy learning experiences. The main M&E tools are centrally coordinated by the Ministry of Finance's Budget Office (Direccion de Presupuestos, or DIPRES) and promote the use of M&E information in government decision-making processes, particularly those related to the budget. These M&E tools have been, however, subject to a number of criticisms. As a result, the experience described in this note does not necessarily offer a model that can, or should, be easily transferred to other countries with different institutional contexts. Furthermore, this note does not reflect the latest changes, nor does it try to offer guidance for the future. However, the Chilean experience summarized here, covering the period of 1994-2010, provides interesting examples and highly relevant lessons about the benefits and limitations of M&E design and implementation.
The Canadian Monitoring and Evaluation System

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-06) Lahey, Robert

Performance measurement, monitoring, and evaluation have long been part of the infrastructure within the federal government in Canada. With more than 30 years of formalized evaluation experience in most large federal departments and agencies, many lessons can be gained, not the least of which is the recognition that the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system itself is not static. The Canadian government has a formalized evaluation policy, standards, and guidelines; and these have been modified on three occasions over the past three decades. Changes have usually come about because of a public sector reform initiative such as the introduction of a results orientation to government management, a political issue that may have generated a demand for greater accountability and transparency in government, or a change in emphasis on where and how M&E information should be used in government. This chapter provides an overview of the Canadian M&E model, examining its defining elements and identifying key lessons learned.
The Australian Goverrnment's M&E System

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-03) Mackay, Keith

Countries from all over the world have shown an interest in Australia's experience in creating a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system that supports evidence-based decision making and performance-based budgeting. The Australian M and E system in existence from 1987-97 was generally considered to be one of the most successful and was driven by the federal Department of Finance (DoF). This note discusses the genesis, characteristics, and success of this particular system and briefly considers the Australian government's approach to M and E after the system was abolished. The contrast between these two periods provides many valuable insights into success factors and challenges facing successful M and E systems, and into implementing evidence-based decision making more broadly.
Use of Social Accountability Tools and Information Technologies in Monitoring and Evaluation

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-02) Sharma, Rajiv

This note attempts to cover the basic concepts relating to the use of social accountability and information technology to monitor and evaluate public services and other governance processes that affect citizens. With the help of simple though practical examples that use these concepts, the note explains how to bring a qualitative change in monitoring and evaluation by making the whole process more citizen centered and outcome oriented. In turn, these practices can help improve the quality of service delivery. The note also covers a few country-specific initiatives from India to support the related arguments.
The Design and Implementation of a Menu of Evaluations

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-01) Rubio, Gloria M.

Policy makers and program managers are faced every day with major decisions resulting from insufficient funding, ongoing complaints about service delivery, unmet needs among different population groups, and limited results on the ground. There is a menu of evaluation types implemented by developing and Organization for Economic Co-operation Development (OECD) countries to tackle a wide range of policy and program management issues, considering time, resources and capacity constraints. International experience highlights the importance of a gradual approach when introducing evaluation tools into country-level monitoring and evaluation (M and E) systems. Different paths may work better for different countries depending on the main purpose of their M and E system, existing institutional capacity, the availability of funds, and external technical assistance.
Key Steps in Designing and Implementing a Monitoring and Evaluation Process : For Individual Country Service Agencies

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010-12) Hatry, Harry

This paper identifies key steps in designing and implementing a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system for ministries and individual government agencies that provide services. These suggestions are intended to apply whether the ministry or agency is in health, education, social welfare, environmental protection, transportation, economic development, public safety, or any other sector. The system might have been ordered or requested by the president or prime minister's office, by a minister, or by any agency head who wants to implement an M&E process. M&E development should focus on providing a process that will yield regular outcome data (in addition to data on the organization's outputs) that can be used by the designing agency and upper-level officials for accountability and, particularly, for managing these organizations, thereby helping officials improve their accountability and services to their citizens.
Defining the Type of M&E System : Clients, Intended Uses, and Actual Utilization

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010-09) Briceño, Bertha

This is the second note in a monthly series on government monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems led by the PREM Poverty Reduction and Equity Group under the guidance of Jaime Saavedra, Gladys Lopez-Acevedo, and Keith Mackay, with contributions from several World Bank colleagues. The main purpose of this series is to synthesize existing knowledge about M&E systems and to document new knowledge on M&E systems that may not yet be well understood. The series targets World Bank, donor staff who is working to support client governments in strengthening their M&E systems, as well as government officials interested in learning about the uses and benefits of M&E and in adopting a more systematic approach toward M&E in their governments.
Pro-Poor Public Spending Reform : Uganda's Virtual Poverty Fund

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2006-03) Williamson, Tim ; Canagarajah, Sudharshan

The Poverty Action Fund (PAF) was introduced in Uganda in 1998 to reorient government expenditures towards implementing its Poverty Education Action Plan (PEAP) as well as to account for Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) resource use. This paper notes the successes of the PAR, the negative aspects, and the key lessons learned. Successes include: reorienting budget allocations towards pro-poor service delivery and demonstrating the additionality of debt relief; mobilizing donor resources and harmonizing conditions; and improved budget predictability, transparency, and accountability. The negative aspects include: unbalanced budget allocations, biased budget implementation, partial monitoring and evaluation, and no exit strategy. The key lessons were: To be effective, a Virtual Poverty Fund (VPF) should be simple and limited to the identification of Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) priority expenditures in the budget classification system; a VPF should be introduced in a way that supports rather than replaces the implementation of such comprehensive improvements in budget preparation and implementation; and a VPF does not bypass the need to have a PRSP and an effective budget process that identify priority pro-poor expenditures to be included in the VPF as part of a broader policy framework for growth and poverty reduction.