Archive

One of Twende Mbele’s projects was a survey of the state of performance M&E culture in national departments in the three countries, tracking progress as they strengthened their M&E systems. This chapter draws on this research and integrates other literature to critically analyse the context for using evidence in African governments. The research findings describe the organisational context of the three governments, building on the analytical framework guiding this book in Chapter 3, particularly the component on context drawn from Politics and Ideas (Weyrauch et al., n.d.). 

The purpose of the research was to assess the state of performance M&E culture in the three participating governments by seeing how each country’s various M&E systems interact to improve performance and accountability, with a specific focus on policy, approach, concepts, framework and organisational arrangements in the public sector in Benin, South Africa and Uganda.

One of the key activities of Twende Mbele is to undertake a survey of the state of M&E culture in partner countries to be used to track progress in these countries as they strengthen their M&E systems. In Ghana, Twende commissioned the Ghana baseline study in collaboration with the Ministry of Monitoring and Evaluation in May 2019. 

The overall objective of the Ghana baseline study is to establish baseline information on the monitoring and evaluation culture within the Public Sector in Ghana. The focus is to establish the extent to which M&E information is used to inform decision-making and assess the state of monitoring and evaluation culture in government by delineating how various M&E systems interact with each other to improve performance and accountability in Ghana’s Public Sector. 

Introduction

As part of Twende Mbele’s efforts to institutionalise equity and strengthen national monitoring and evaluation systems, in partnership with the Kenyan Government through the Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate, it was agreed to conduct a ‘Diagnostic Study of the Gender Responsiveness of National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (NIMES) Kenya’. 

The study commissioned was by the National Treasury and Planning (Ministry) through the Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate and supported by a broad national reference group comprising both government and non-government stakeholders. The study was undertaken between June and October 2019. 

Objectives of the study

1. Undertake a diagnostic study of the existing country evaluation system; investigating the extent to which the evaluation policies, procedures, frameworks and internal systems relate to what ought to be characteristic of an effective national gender responsive monitoring and evaluation system. 

2. Identify existing and potential barriers as well as enablers for a well-functioning gender responsive M&E system 

Monitoring and Evaluation plays an important role for effective and meaningful implementation of plans, policies, programmes and projects. The Kenya National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy provides an overall guidance on the establishment and implementation of the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) function in the public sector. This is the first Policy on M&E in the country that articulates the government’s commitment to accountability for development results. 

The Policy defines mechanisms for measuring efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation of public policies, programmes and projects implementation. It outlines the principles for a strong M&E system as an important instrument for driving the achievements of programmes and government operations underpinning the Kenya Vision 2030. Further, it sets the basis for a transparent process by which the citizenry and other development stakeholders can undertake a shared appraisal of results. It outlines roles and responsibilities of public sector institutions, civil society, private sector, academia, media and development partners involved in implementation of policies, projects and programmes. 

Monitoring and evaluation processes help inform policy decision making in different spheres of government, including budget formulation. Even though M&E is predominantly used to track and evaluate various government programs and policies, it can play a critical role in improving the cost effectiveness of the program budgets. 

The current guidance from OECD and PEFA (Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Framework) says that national budgets should be linked to national development plans and medium-term strategic priorities that go beyond the traditional annual cycle and recognizes the alignment of budgets with strategic planning to identify the resources required to achieve planned outputs and outcomes. Challenges often exist despite using various budgeting tools because of a lack of technical capacity, weak data management systems (and inadequate performance data), and an overall lack of understanding of why M&E is important in budgeting.

Therefore, even if there are different tools that allow for the linkage between national plans and budgets, their implementation can vary depending on country strategies on Public Financial Management (PFM) reform. This review looks at specific strategies that can either enhance the usage of existing tools in the system like Medium-Term Budgeting, Public Expenditure Reviews or incorporate new tools like the World Bank’s readiness assessment for M&E implementation. Medium term budgeting as a PFM reform, creates an effective link between annual budgets and national priorities, while performance-based budgeting is another tool that can enable the implementation of the medium-term budgeting.2 (OECD) 

The budget process involves various actors and stakeholders, some of which are common across different countries. A standard budget process involves the Ministry of Finance as the key stakeholder, which coordinates with the rest of the government to formulate the annual budget.