CONTENTS

1. STRENGTHENING NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC EXPENDITURE IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICAAgricultural Public Expenditure Training WorkshopAccra, Ghana(April 13 -14, 2011)MODULE 4SPECIALIZED STUDIES:PUBLIC EXPENDITURE TRACKING SURVEYS(PETS)

2. CONTENTS • BACKGROUND • OBJECTIVE/SCOPE • METHODOLOGY • DATA SOURCES • PROCESS • TA TEAM • TIMELINE

3. I) BACKGROUND • A problem arises when public funds do not reach frontline service providers, or when they do, that they are used inefficiently. • Limited information on quality of services undermines accountability and effective use of scarce public resources. • A specialized study – PETS - can be conducted to complement the Basic Agric Diagnostic analysis to assess this type of problem. • PETS focus on outputs of public programmes. • The template TOR for PETS (A4.1) draw on various sources (A4.2, A4.3, for example of PETS in Uganda, see A4.4): • Practitioner’s Toolkit for AgPERs (WB/DFID, 2010) • Public Expenditure Management Handbook (World Bank, 1998) • Other reports (especially “PETS-QSDS in SSA: A Stocktaking Study”)

4. II) OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE Objectives:   • Assist selected governments in SSA to assess whether public  resources budgeted for key agriculture sector programmes are effectively reaching the intended programmes and beneficiaries, and in a cost-effective manner.  • Provide evidence-based insights into service delivery problems to high level policy and decision makers. • Carry out a field survey to track resources through focusing on administrative and procedural steps of budget execution. • Pinpoint bottlenecks, inefficiencies or deviations from the intended purposes, and to provide recommended corrective actions. • Provide a diagnostic tool which will  identify  sources and extent  of  inefficiency or leakage of public services, and as an analytical  tool to discover the causes of poor service delivery.

5. Scope:PETS focus on examining the effectiveness of agric expenditures with respect to  the outputs of key services (see Chart) rather than outcomes and impact. • Key Activities: covers a range of activities. • Survey Focus: on agric exp. where there are concerns about inefficiencies (and/or high unit costs) in resource use (e.g., agric extension services) or high costs (e.g., fertilizer support). (3) Country Selection: Various prerequisites: adequate level of PEM; completed recent AgPER; evidence of concerns about delivery of services of substantial expenditure items. (4) Institutional Scope: Choice of area as focus of PETS will determine responsible and collaborating ministry(ies)/related agencies.

6. Chart - Output indicators: Coverage and Utilization of Ag. Services

7. Relationships of I-O-O is Key for PETS (example from Uganda AgPER/PETS analysis)

8. III) METHODOLOGY Overview: • Scale and complexity of PETS will vary greatly from country to country, based on various factors: • Complexity of service or expenditure program • Adequacy and reliability of data • Time and cost required • Difficult to propose a “standard methodology • “Simple” vs. “Complex” survey/PETS (see Table)

9. Simple vs. Complex PETS

10. Steps for a PETS 1) Preparatory Stage: • Identify focus area (prior to engaging TA Team) • Understand Focus area setting, involving resource flows, role of key actors in the delivery “chain” • Assess data availability and collection capacity 2) Sampling and Questionnaire Design: unlikely survey instruments can be standardized • Design sample survey: stratified random sample • Prepare draft questionnaire: Establish key hypotheses and tailor questionnaire to various administrative levels (central, regional, district government; service providers)

11. Steps for a PETS (cont.) 3) Implementation • Identify enumerators/interviewers • Field Test the draft questionnaire on pilot basis • Collect Data after survey is finalized, and ensure monitoring and supervision to ensure data reliability • Enter and clean data to control for data errors 4) Data Analysis, Reporting and Dissemination • Data Analysis by TA team, using graphical method • Reporting by TA team, focusing on summary of data analysis • Dissemination to key actors, using workshop(s), in collaboration with MOA/agency concerned

12. Types of Conclusions and Recommendations • Emerging from the analysis of survey data • Arising beyond the scope of the PETS: • Whether specific norms for  the  delivery  of  a  service  shouldbe  set,  and what they might be • The extent to which budget reallocations should be made that would enhance effectiveness or “value for money” • The need for improved accounting systems to enhance transparency in budget allocations and accountability • The need to build capacity at  different levels  in order to enhance service delivery or operations • Introduction of incentives to make the delivery system more client-driven at all levels

13. IV) SOURCES OF DATA AND INFORMATION • A PETS focuses on generating new data • Also, a useful PETS starts with sound grasp of the sector, Ag. PE and areas of service delivery. Key information sources will include: • Official sources • Studies and “Grey” sources • Sources for reviewing sector outputs and outcomes

14. V) PROCESS • Participatory Process • Establish working partnership with key actors • Ensure TA team has active counterparts • Key Phases (3): to be carried out by the TA team, guided by Steering Group (SG) • Preparatory Phase • Stakeholder Briefing • Inception Workshop • Setting up SG • Implementation Phase • Survey Implementation • Technical Workshop • Data Analysis • Reporting Phase: draft diagnostic report; draft summary diagnostic report workshop (after 4 months); Full Analytical Report (reflect relevant comments; within 5 months of start)

15. Implementation Process/Arrangements • A Steering Group (SG) of key stakeholders to provide oversight of the exercise and link to high level decision-makers • Timing and length of survey will depend on its focus and extent it has seasonal characteristics • Simple PETS: about 5 months • Complex PETS: 9 months or longer • TA team to carry out the PETs (with local counterparts) • International Expert: methodological & cross-country expertise • Local Expert: country/sector knowledge • Important to engage the donor working group

16. VI) TA TEAM: Key Tasks and Outputs • Help refine focus area for survey • Desig the survey and make preparations for the survey • Monitor and supervision of data collection • Carry out data analysis • Prepare a summary diagnostic report • Prepare a full analytical report • Design/manage inception, technical & report workshops • Liaising with  the  DWG • Identify  capacity  building  needs • Formulate recommendations for enhancing service delivery  and the effectiveness of targeted expenditures • Ensure that all data utilised is assembled online

17. TA Team: Key Reports and Data Base Key Reports • Inception report: within two weeks, identifies issues & scope of survey • Summary  diagnostic  report: upon completion of the initial data analysis, presents the main results of the survey • Full  analytical  report: within one month of the completion of the initial  analysis, presents main results and recommendations • Final report: within five months, incorporating the relevant feedback to the results and recommendations Database • During the assignment, TA  team, in collaboration with MoA and MoF, will  establish a database including background documents and sources, evaluation methodology, data sampling frame and questionnaires, survey data, working papers & analyses to be online   • This database will be used for capacity building purposes as part of a joint learning activity  

18. VII) TIMELINE About 5 months (plus 3+ months for complex PETS) Resources Required: • TA Consultant Team (1 international + 1 local consultant) • MOA and/or other relevant agency to provide one full-time counterpart or team equivalent for each consultant • Think tanks, universities and other local participants will not be remunerated • For complex PETS, additional funds may need to be mobilized from other sources (e.g. donor working group)

19. KEY REFERENCES/DOCUMENTS(See Annex 4 for selected items/excerpts) A4.1: Template TOR for Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (June, 2010) A4.2: Survey Tools for Assessing Performance in Service Delivery (1 page overview, excerpt from: Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution: Evaluation Techniques and Tools, by F. Bourguignon and L. da Silva, Editors, WB, 2008) A4.3: PETS-QSDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Stocktaking Study, by Gauthier,  World Bank,  September  2006 (excerpt) A4.4: Uganda PETS Assessment (excerpt from Uganda, Ag. PER (Feb., 2010) A4.5: Analyzing the Incidence of Public Spending: Overview of Key Concepts (1 page overview, excerpt from: Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution: Evaluation Techniques and Tools, by F. Bourguignon and L. da Silva, Editors, WB, 2008) Relevant Website references include: web.worldbank.org/apea and www.worldbank.org/afr/agperprogram