Using Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys to Monitor Projects and Small-Scale Programs

Courtney Tolmie

Description

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) are a tried and tested methodology to identify delays in financial and in-kind transfers, leakages, and other inefficiencies in government programs. This guidebook aims to provide a starting point for civil society groups and other organizations interested in taking a closer look at government spending processes, both on a small and a larger scale. It is designed to lead users from the definition of the appropriate Public Expenditure Tracking Survey to be used, to the dissemination of its findings, with an emphasis on using evidence effectively to influence policy decisions at any level.
Based on the experience of the World Bank in measuring and improving the effectiveness of service delivery, this approach helps empower citizens to keep service providers accountable through better information, communication, and engagement.

Informations

• Publié par: world-bank-publications
• Publié le: 13 août 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 17
• EAN13: 9780821385203
• Langue: English

Extrait

Using Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys to Monitor Projects and Small-Scale Programs /A Guidebook

Margaret Koziol and Courtney Tolmie

Using Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys to Monitor Projects and Small-Scale Programs

Washington, D.C.

A Guidebook

Margaret Koziol and Courtney Tolmie

©2010 e International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ e World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: [phone] Internet: www.worldbank.org

All rights reserved 1 2 3 4 13 12 11 10

is volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/e World Bank. e findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this volume do not necessarily refl ect the views of the Executive Directors of  e World Bank or the governments they represent. e World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work.  e boundaries, colors, denominations, and other informatio n shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgement on the part of  e World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

Rights and Permissions e material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law.  e International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ e World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of the work promptly. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the Copyright Clearance Center Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; telephone: [phone]; fax: [phone]; Internet: www. copyright.com. All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, e World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: [phone]; e-mail: [e-mail].

ISBN: 978-0-8213-8519-7 e-ISBN: 978-0-8213-8520-3 DOI: 10.1596/978-0-8213-8519-7

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data has been requested.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 What is a Public Expenditure Tracking Survey? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Step 0. Defining the Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Step 1. Mapping Resource Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Step 2. Collecting and Analyzing the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Step 3. Identifying the Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Step 4. Recommending Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Step 5. Dissemination and Advocacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Annex A: World Bank PETS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Annex B: CSO-Led PETS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Annex C: Resources for Power Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

iii  

Acknowledgments

is guidebook is the product of a collaborative eff ort between the World Bank Human Development Network’s Offi ce of the Chief Economist and the Transparency and Accountability Program (TAP) of the Results for Development Institute.   e goal of this partnership is to support the capacity of civil society organizations (CSOs) to monitor and evaluate government programs in the human development sectors.

e World Bank contributes to this partnership by off ering support to civil society organizations participating in the program, including con- tributing technical expertise on Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) and absenteeism methodologies, preparing training materials, re- viewing research instruments and reports, and supporting workshops and courses for the researchers involved in the studies.  e Bank also takes an active role in making connections between the CSOs supported by TAP and task teams to build links with operations.

Established in 2006 with support from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, TAP focuses on strengthening the demand side of gover- nance by providing technical and fi nancial support to civil society organi- zations (e.g., non-governmental organizations [NGOs], think tanks, and universities) involved in promoting the accountability of public services to civil society and to citizens through analysis and advocacy.

TAP’s activities aim to address the major barriers that civil society organi- zations face in turning actions into results: weak institutional capacity and skills, non-existent or adversarial relationships with government and poli- cymakers, and lack of access to information.TAP helps organizations over- come these barriers by supporting access to information, providing both the incentive and tools to develop analytic skills and capabilities, and pro- viding technical support and peer learning opportunities to help connect

v  

Please send comments to [e-mail] and ctolmie@results- fordevelopment.org.

CSOs with government and stakeholders so that their policy recommen- dations might be heard.

vi 

is guidebook benefitted from comments by and conversations with many colleagues, including Zafar Ahmed, Deon Filmer, Ariel Fiszbein, Bernard Gauthier, Markus Goldstein, Charles Griffi n, Kai Kaiser, Dena Ringold, and many current and former TAP program participants.

raogPrealScl-almSdnastcejorPsmUngsiTEPotSnoMroti

Using Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys to Monitor Projects and Small-Scale Programs

Overview

Most often, Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) are referred to in the context of a large, nationally sampled public expenditure review, or in the context of similar studies conducted by organizations such as the World Bank. A tried and tested methodology, PETS have been shown to be effective in identifying delays in fi nancial and in-kind transfers, leakage rates, and general inefficiencies in public spending. Recently, civil society organizations have successfully taken up this methodology as part of a push for budget accountability from the ground up, an eff ort supported in part by the creation of this guidebook.

Civil society organizations’ comparative advantage resides in their ability to “take the temperature” on the ground and to act on those issues that are most heated in the minds of the citizens whom they represent. In many cases, service delivery in the education and health sectors is a top priority. One way of improving service delivery, by keeping both govern- ments and service providers accountable, is through the monitoring of budgets and efficiencies in public spending. PETS, when used by civil society organizations, off er an opportunity to carefully monitor specifi c programs or public spending in targeted districts and regions. Moreover, this instrument may be used to monitor World Bank and other projects. is brand of accountability strengthens the voice of citizens and focuses the discussion on problems that may be micro-level in nature, or specifi c to a particular region of a country.

1  

2  Using PETS to Monitor Projects and Small-Scale Programs

e goal of this guidebook is to serve as a starting point for civil soci- ety organizations , as well as Bank teams interested in conducting Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys, both on a small and larger scale. It is de- signed to lead a research team from idea inception to results dissemination, while emphasizing the importance of utilizing evidence to infl uence poli- cy, regardless of whether it is on a macro or microlevel.  ough the World Bank has been at the forefront of eff orts to measure the effectiveness of service delivery, it is hoped that Bank teams and civil society alike will take the research one step further and empower citizen users to keep ser- vice providers accountable through information dissemination and citizen engagement efforts.

The Power of PETS Experiences with PETS point to the strength of this particular methodology when used to monitor programs, projects, and public spending. Some illustrative examples of fi ndings from these studies include the experiences of Ghana, where 50 percent of non-wage education expenditures and 80 percent of non-wage health ex- penditures did not reach intended benefi ciaries; of Zambia, where leakage rates of discretionary non-wage expenditures reached 76 percent; and of Chad, where less than 1 percent of the non-wage budget officially allocated to regions actually reached health cen- ters 1  In Ghana, researchers found that incidences of leakage were . more prevalent when the value of in-kind materials distributed to beneficiaries was unknown. Researchers in Zambia found evidence to suggest that a few select schools with greater bargaining power were able to capture the majority of the funds. And, in the case of Chad, it was estimated that, had all resources offi cially budgeted to regions actually reached service providers, the number of patients seeking primary health care would have more than doubled. These examples are only a small indication of what researchers can do by strategically utilizing the PETS methodology.

1 Ye and Sundharshan 2002, Gauthier and Wane 2006, and Das, et al 2004a.

A Guidebook 3  

What is a Public Expenditure Tracking Survey?

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys are tools in a methodology used to track the flow of public resources (including human, fi nancial, or in- kind) from the highest levels of government to frontline service providers. PETS first identify a research objective, then employ an extensive map- ping exercise in order to understand the fl ow of funds through the dif- ferent levels of government. Once the resource fl ows are mapped, budget data are collected and analyzed, and often complemented with a facilities survey and qualitative research. PETS can help civil society and policy makers alike to understand funding fl ows, identify areas of leakage, and make informed policy decisions based on their fi ndings.

Goals and Uses

PETS were developed to gather information beyond offi cial data and administrative records to understand what actually happens to money that is appropriated for service delivery. We propose a two-tiered typol- ogy to describe how PETS can be applied in the human development sectors.

Analytical PETS – PETS with an Applied Research Focus

e first PETS conducted by the World Bank was a diagnostic tool to sup- port a Public Expenditure Review (PER) in Uganda. At the national lev- el, funding had been provided for non-salary expenditures to each school in the form of a capitation grant. Normally a PER would take note of the amount attributed to each school and how it compared to what was need- ed for non-salary inputs. In this case, the PETS allowed analysis of what actually happened in the allocation; the result was startling. On average, 87 percent of the grant did not reach the school and was diverted along the way. e Ugandan government subsidized an information campaign alerting service users to the fi ndings, whose results were later correlated to a decrease in the amount of the grant being diverted in subsequent years. Outside agencies have come to see PETS as a good instrument for