Overview of PRS-1: Implementation, Coordination & Monitoring

1. Presenting the AGENDA FOR TRANSFORMATION (AfT) Engaging the CSOs on AfT Monitoring from HRBA Approach Overview of PRS-1: Implementation, Coordination & Monitoring Ministry of Planning Republic of Liberia

2. Outline • Background • Experience from PRS implementation • Major Constraints to PRS implementation • Key PRS lessons learnt • Best Practices in PRS implementation

3. Background • Liberia’s first post war development agenda, the Lift Liberia PRS ended in 2011 with a focus on relief, recovery, and reconstruction. • Despite many challenges, Liberia has experienced robust growth and improvement in social, economic, and institutional indicators. • Several key lessons learned from PRS implementation

4. Experience from PRS1 • The PRS1 was developed through a consultative and participatory process. PRS objectives and activities organized into four pillars: • Peace and Security • Economic Revitalization • Governance & Rule of Law • Infrastructure & Basic Services • Cross cutting issues, particularly capacity building and gender equality was also a quasi-pillar • Each pillar had a matrix of planned actions and responsible agencies, with the focus mostly on OUTPUTS (deliverables) • 15 County Development Agendas were also developed for each county to guide the local activity of the service delivery ministries

5. Experience from PRS1 • PRS implementation was coordinated by the LRDC Steering Committee chaired by the President. The LRDC Secretariat managed the day to day affairs working with the sectors and pillars • The cost of implementing the PRS was estimated at US$1.6 billion: • GoL commitments US$500 million from the national budget • Donor commitments US$600 million • Year 1 implementation was slow relative to potential ( only 20% of deliverables completed) • Rapid Results Approach (using 90-Day Plans) introduced at PRS Cabinet Retreat to reorganize agencies and accelerate implementation rate • Civil society and private sector participation in PRS implementation was not clearly defined • Effective monitoring of PRS posed a challenge due to weak coordination between field level M&E and the national unit

6. Constraints to implementation • Ownership: A lack of whole government approach to the PRS (legislature, judiciary, executive) • Capacity: Inadequate human and institutional capacity to implement effectively • Alignment: National budget allocations were not always aligned to the PRS • Coordination: poor coordination between GoL, Civil society and the Private Sector

7. KEY PRS LESSONS LEARNT • National budget allocations and the budget process were not aligned to the national development plan (PRS) • Coordination mechanism around donor assistance in terms of alignment and harmonization was very weak; • PRS implementation must take deliberate actions to address issues of inequality, marginalization and inclusion; • Focus was more about interventions and deliverables than development results (outcome); • Monitoring and Evaluation was weak, without clear baselines, targets and outcome-focused indicators • Participation of some key stakeholders (CSO & Private sector) must be enhanced

8. Best Practices • National development planning must be sensitive to the nexus between economic growth and social inclusion • Implementation of the national agenda must be based on a clear results chain with a focus on achieving outcomes and impact • A strong mechanism to coordinate government, CSO and private sector must be established • A strong Monitoring & Evaluation framework with clear baselines, targets and outcome-focused indicators to measure development results • National budget that is strongly aligned to the national agenda

9. THANK YOU