Corruption Tracking/Assessment Tool Barbara Magezi Ndamira – AFTPR PREM Week 2010

1. Development of a Data Tracking Mechanism Corruption Tracking/Assessment Tool Barbara MageziNdamira – AFTPRPREM Week 2010

2. Data Tracking Mechanism • Background • Features • Process • Progress • Challenges • Next Steps

3. Data Tracking Mechanism:Background • Deteriorating Governance environment – TI going down, NIS 2008 – 51% pay bribes in health sector, • Four high corruption cases – CHOGM, GFTAM, GAVI and NSSF. • Difficult dialogue at highest level – • Disjointed/fragmented dialogue/response by development partners

4. Data Tracking Mechanism:Background • Bank IEG report and ICR for previous CAS critical of engagement on GAC issues • Development Partners challenged by own Governments on VfM • Bank decision to focus on broader governance issues.[new CAS] • Development Partners focus on “corruption” under “Joint Response to Corruption initiative”

5. Data Tracking Mechanism: Features • “Joint Approach to corruption” will need agreed upon set of indictors to establish trends • Level of comfort for both GoU and Development Partners • Can inform other programs – PRSC, JBSF, projects GAAPs

6. Data Tracking Mechanism: Features • Trends that point towards system weaknesses and guide reforms • Can track progress on various reforms aimed at curbing corruption • Identify critical issues on the horizon

7. Preliminary work Preliminary work Medium Medium - - term implementation term implementation Strand A Establishment of core corruption Indicators Establishment of core corruption indicators Strand B Improving the quality of national data sources Improving the quality of national data sources Strand C Building Uganda Government - led Data Tracking Mechanism Building Ugandan Government – – led Data Tracking Mechanism Building a non Govt. Peer review Mechanism Strand D Building non - - government peer review mechanism Additional work under Accountability Sector to undertake periodic independent analysis at grass root level and on Grand Corruption Data Tracking Mechanism:Process

8. Data Tracking Mechanism:Process • Consultations In Country – Bank, DFID and two consultants – Great Support from PREMPS • In Country review – reports and surveys • OAG reports, APRM reports, PEFA, PPMS, CPAR etc • Budget Monitoring Unit reports; PPDA Audits; Payroll Audits etc, NIS, NSDS, Panel Surveys • External Reports Review

9. Data Tracking Mechanism: Challenge with Indicators??? • Dearth of specific indicators - what do we need to know? • Cleanliness of Data • Many Indicators perception based • Cost of regular tracking [NIS, NSDS etc too expensive & not regular–[trends] • Definition of big; grand; small etc

10. Data Tracking Mechanism: Challenge with Indicators??? • Currently relying on International Indicators • WBI, TI, Afro Barometer, MCC, etc not locally appreciated • Other possibilities exists but need organization. • HRM Actionable Governance Indicators - • PEFA reviews-

11. Data Tracking Mechanism:Form • Trying to frame Corruption by Public Function • Service delivery, Procurement, Judiciary actions • Budget, HR management, Audit follow up • Trying to Frame Corruption by Approach • Prevention….Detection …….Enforcement…… • Aggregated Indicators: • Is corruption getting better/worse ? • Actionable indicators: • What is the Government /Donors doing about it?

12. Data Tracking Mechanism:Criteria for Indicator Selection • Specific Selection Criteria: • Data is accurate, consistent and reliable. • Data for Uganda is readily available and easily accessible. • Data is collected frequently, ideally every 1 or 2 years. • Data relates to corruption and governance activities which directly impact corruption prevention, detection, or enforcement.

13. Data Tracking Mechanism:Criteria for Indicator Selection • General Selection Criteria: • Sustainability of DTM, and country ownership • Local data source • Preference to existing data sources but up-coming data efforts also considered. • Experiences and views from different stakeholders.

14. Data Tracking MechanismIndicatorSources – Local -National Service Delivery Survey - • Section 2A: Education Primary: Question 224[2] Accountability in the School - %of primary education facilities involving misuse of funds in last financial year. • Section 2B: Education Primary: Question 224[5] Accountability in the School - % of primary education facilities involving misuse of funds in the last financial year where no action was taken on culprit • Section 8: Governance : Question 808(2): Accountability in the Sub County and rating of overall performance of the sub county Administration: % of sub-counties involving misuse of funds in last financial year.

15. Data Tracking MechanismIndicator Sources - Local – with Gaps • Auditor General’s reports • Annual audit reports • % of MDAs with unaccounted for funds? • % of unaccounted for funds in a given year [not specific enough] • Value for money reports • Costs and Process might be prohibitive • Specific forensic reports • Regularity

16. Aggregated Corruption Indicators Potential Sources [helps take the pulse] • World Governance Indicators: Control of Corruption, Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness. (World Bank) – • Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer (Transparency International) • % of respondents reporting that they had paid a bribe in the previous 12 months; in health and education sectors and the police and judiciary

17. Data Tracking Mechanism –Management • DTM managing/operating agency • Economic Policy Research Centre – credible and independent institution • Advisory Committee • Accountability Sector Working Group • Government Accountability agencies • Development Partners??? • Critical agencies with data sources??? • International Collaborator/Partner • Civil Society Organizations/Collaborators

18. Data Tracking mechanismNext Steps • Issues to confirm: • Data/Report Release process – • Government or Agency? • Indicators • Operating costs • Role of Parliament • Communication Strategy • Dissemination across all stakeholders THANK YOU!!!