Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Unlocking Zambias potential in Governance | Service Delivery | Poverty Reduction | Social Justice and Equality | Economic Growth and Development | |Mining | Health | Education | Infrastructure| Agriculture
Prepared by: Salim Kaunda, (Researcher) with the Support of Michelle Morel (Executive Director) Chileshe Chaunga (Research Intern), Isaac Dumbe (Communication Specialist), Brian Sambo Mwila (Communication Specialist), Agatha Siwale (Senior Researcher).
ABBREVIATIONS
GDI MDD GFI JASZ II KPIs APRM CPIA PF PEFA SNDP MTEF Government Development Index Management Development Division Grassroots Focus Index The Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia II Key Performance Indicators African Peer Review Mechanism Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Patriotic Front Public Expenditure and Financial Administration Sixth National Development Plan Medium Term Expenditure Framework
2.
GDI Series
GDI Series
3.
CONTENTS
15
21
30
40
4.
GDI Series
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
ear fellow researchers, Policy Monitoring and Research Centre (PMRC), is a think tank committed to promoting public understanding through research and education, encouraging debate on social and economic policy issues critical to the growth of poverty reduction. The vision of PMRC is Unlocking Zambias Potential through timely, relevant evidence based policy analysis and reform proposals. Our aims include: To promote public understanding through research and education. To encourage and facilitate debate on social and economic policy issues critical to poverty reduction. To be a source of quality data relevant for stakeholders in areas of social and economic development To produce quality policy analysis and
To disseminate research based reform proposals. As part of the process of unlocking the resources available to Zambia, we at PMRC recognize that our greatest asset are the minds of the Zambian people. Our role is to engage all Zambians, and inform them of policy, policy changes and the consequences of policy decisions in their day-to-day lives. We look forward to engaging more with all Zambians in the coming period. Thank you for taking time to read this PMRC publication and please get involved and voice your opinions through PMRCs many engagement channels. Yours truly,
5.
ood governance is critical to long-term economic, social and environmental development. This Background Note outline the scope and functions of Government Indicators, showing exactly what they indicate. It explores the role of Key performance indicators (KPIs) and standards of good governance indicators. It then analyzes the structure of 3 identified Indices (Mo Ibrahim, Commitment to Development and Grassroots focused Index) and hence shows the importance of measuring government performance. This provides a background / best practice for evaluating government Key Performance indicators. The Background Note concludes by outlining the key components of good indicators and why it is necessary to develop a Government Delivery Index. There is an increasing demand from developing country governments, civil society organizations and donor agencies to measure different aspects of democracy, human rights and economic development. This demand has resulted in a tremendous growth in indicator frameworks and indices, which are used to measure the performance of governments delivery, the quality of public institutions, and peoples perceptions on various aspects of governance.
Governance
Governance is defined as the system of values, policies and institutions by which a society manages its economic, political and social affairs through interactions within and among the state, civil society and private sector. It comprises three (3) dimensions interdependent in society, namely, social, economic and political governance. The role of government is to provide a stable political, social and economic environment. Government policies throughout the world aim to promote fiscal responsibility; remove barriers to competition; ensure a legal framework for property rights and regulatory oversight; and ensure transparency of the law and policies.
6.
GDI Series
A question worth exploring therefore is: What are Governance Indicators and what do they really measure?
Indicators
To indicate is to point out something or to measure. Therefore, in simple terms, an indicator is a measure. Indicators are basically stipulated targets of objectives which give the basis of measurement.
Governance Indicators
A governance indicator is a measure that points out the state of governance in a country. They are intended to inform and are usually narrowed to more specific areas of governance such as electoral systems, corruption, human rights, public service delivery, civil society, and gender equality. (e.g., Ministerial Sectors.) From a development perspective, governance indicators can be used for monitoring and evaluation of governance programmes and projects. These indicators are also often used to establish benchmarks, objectives, targets, and goals in the development context. Indicators, therefore, form targets or goals which the government puts on board as a basis of targeting achievements and how to track progress towards goals. In Zambia, Governance Indicators overall form an analysis of desired areas of performance. The next section explains in detail what Indicators really indicate and measure. This is done by first outlining the characteristics of good governance indicators, after which, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be explained in detail. Lastly, an analysis of 3 Indices will be outlined, clearly showing how they measure performance and delivery.
7.
GDI Series
Index
An index consists of multiple indicators combined into a composite or aggregated unit. While the development of indices is a complex task, indices have the potential to attract the decision maker and media attention. From the information outlined, we would now qualify the formulation of the Government Delivery Index (GDI), as an effective tool to measure the performance of the Zambian Government from the basis of its various stated aims and commitments. The Government Delivery index (GDI) will leverage from renowned indices such as the Mo Ibrahim Foundation Index of African Governance, the Commitment to Development Index (CDI) and the Grassroots Focus Index (GFI).
authorities and partners to assess progress in governance. It is compiled using 86 Indicators grouped into 14 sub-categories and 4 overarching categories, to measure the effective delivery of public goods and services to African Citizens.
The rationale is that the data gathered comes in different units and scales. Before they can be used in the Ibrahim Index, they are transformed onto a scale on which they can be meaningfully compared and averaged. Once the 86 indicators have been transformed to a common scale, each one is grouped with similar indicators to form 14 sub-categories.
Indices Analysed
1. The Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance. 2. The Grassroots Focus Index 3. The Commitment to Development Index.
Human Development
Mo Ibrahim Index
Sustainable economic opportunity
The sub-category score is the simple average of all the indicator scores. Sub-categories are then grouped into one of four (4) categories, as shown in figure 1. The category score is the average of subcategory scores. The category scores are then averaged to produce the final Ibrahim Index score. Underlying indicators are combined in a standardized way to provide statistical measure of governance performance.
GDI Series
9.
Methodology- the index captures 21 indicators in its measurement. The composite indicators are based on 3 key pillars: Three best practice principles can be drawn from the GFI structure. These are: a solid theoretical framework; a sound process of construction; a good quality underlying data set;
The GFI has a set of 8 themes in its construction structure: -(a) Responsiveness;(b) Empowerment; (c) Political Governance; (d) Equity (e) Resource commitment and flows; and (f) Participatory budgeting and capacity to influence. The rationale of the GFI is to assess if the grassroots (local people) are considered in policy making, policy implementation and policy monitoring. This is done because the local citizens are the impact bearers of the government decisions and laws.
10.
GDI Series
Aid
Technology
Trade
Security
Investment
Environment
Migration
The CDI uses a range of model selection criteria instead of just one standard. The model in selection is not limited to one view of what complexity means or how it should be perceived. The rationale is that, literally, it is not possible to go into the field and measure the theoretical constructs directly in order to determine whether such models are an accurate representation of reality. Thus, critical measurement is necessary.
11.
Clearly defined, easy to understand and interpret, and able to show trends over time; Scientific and credible, based on high quality data; Policy relevant; Relevant to users, politically acceptable and a basis for action; Responsive to changes in the environment and related human activities; Able to provide a basis for international comparison by providing a threshold or reference value; Subject to aggregation (from household to community, from community to nation.); Objective (be independent of the data collector); and Have reasonable data requirements;
CONCLUSION
Appropriate indicators and how they tie in to the formulation of indices are vital tools for measuring government performance. Critical analysis is needed in formulating and selecting the type or kind of indicator, as the findings from an index should influence policy formulation process and monitoring criteria.
12.
GDI Series
GDI Series
13.
ambia does not have one consolidated and widely accepted tool for measuring Government delivery of development commitments and targets. There does exist a list of targets, Key Performance Indicators (KPI) at Ministry level, but KPIs do not measure government delivery on commitments. The brief builds and proposes a single, widely accepted composite index, the Government Delivery Index (GDI). The GDI will create awareness and drive Government to align its various strategies, track and timely review its performance. This Policy Brief builds the case for the Government to develop a standard tool (metric), which will be a guide for monitoring and evaluating performance and progress towards delivering on its commitments. Alignment of key strategic documents is an urgent requirement as it will enhance a harmonized way of monitoring Government delivery.
Summary
This Policy Brief argues the case for Government to develop the Government Delivery Index (GDI) as a performance monitoring, evaluation and learning tool, to support relevant policy and also enlighten the Zambian people on how the Government is delivering on its commitments.
and African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). In this regard, a standard tool of measuring government performance and delivery is an urgent requirement.
Background
Zambians have high expectations of the government to deliver, based on the commitments of its Partys Manifesto. The Government needs to ensure that it constantly tracks and measures progress on delivery and how aligned it is to the Partys Manifesto commitments. Governments with enhanced measurement systems tend to be more effective and efficient in their delivery. There is confidence in the policies of government, yet it is still a long road ahead to the desired outcomes. This calls for strategising national statistical capacity activity. Notably, there is also an opportunity for Government to review the development of Key Performance Indicators, clearly, defined, detailed and feasible. These observations support the recommendation for Government to work towards a comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation approach of government commitments.
GDI Series
15.
100 80 60 40 20 0
>7 5% M S i n ni e ci
a e p nc r Su e t a W
. nd
..
y pl
an
t re ce S en nt ltu alth nan gy e % ism AID m u 5 m rn / r er ic 0% -7 He ver ve iron % Tou HIV <6 Agr En o o 0 G 6 l G Env ca o L
No. of KPI Targets met
d.
..
The approaches clearly havent been effective and thus the need for a very consolidated, detailed and comprehensive Government measurement tool or metric that would run through all sectors of Government. The Annual Sector Performance Analysis (ASPA) was also undertaken to feed into Government reviews and review performance for the previous year. This initiative also failed to fully measure Government delivery and also; a yearly review had short falls of mission drift and denied any steps of corrective action within the year. There is no formal domestication/ localization of the Regional agreements, the Paris declaration, the Accra Agenda and the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) to which Zambia is subscribed. Ministry of Finance and National Planning, Paris declaration evaluation, phase II (2011). This has contributed to the Government not to have a standard tool or mechanism; formulated to suit the Governance system in Zambia and help to track the Key Performance Indicators, in terms of delivery aligned to the Party Manifestos commitments.
Alignment and Harmonization must be done to improve developmental opportunities and alignment of developmental priorities for the donors and government. It will also promote co-funding,
GDI Series
17.
as there will be one clear focus of operation, defined sets of KPIs and also allow for standard monitoring of delivery due to aligned priorities. This satisfies the agreed development principles that where endorsed by the Accra Agenda and Paris declaration as follows; ownership, alignment, harmonization, mutual accountability, and management of development risks. 2. Develop a common assessment framework, Review existing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and the formulation criteria. This is because a framework to facilitate integration does not exist in Zambia. Also, the absence of specific institutions, mandated at promoting Sustainable Development and delivery at sectoral and national levels as well as lack of localized indicators for monitoring progress towards sustainable development and delivery. This would allow the Government to standardize the measurement, evaluation and assessment of all Sector KPIs and thus a clear track of performance will be developed. The Government Delivery Index would be the most effective and reliable metric to use across all sectors and help to measure delivery and performance. 3. Improve Ministerial budgetary allocations; have a human resource development strategy. Progress towards achieving Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) should be monitored over set periods and objective feedback and guidance provided with the view to correcting identified obstacles, where necessary through capacity building. This is especially so for the PF government where some public office bearers are either new to the role or would benefit from updating their skills. Also, an Assessment of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) needs to be carried out so as to identify the existing gaps and as such add up to a standard mechanism, a Government Delivery Index.
CONCLUSION
This is a strong case for government to review and develop a comprehensive assessment of the Monitoring and Evaluating across all sectors. There is a case for urgent consideration of the Government Delivery Index, reviewing of existing Key Performance Indicators and harmonizing of the key national strategic documents. Budgetary allocations determine how many KPIs will be achieved and as such, needs to be increased for Key sectors especially. There is also an urgent need for the Government to develop a standard, comprehensive, widely accepted tool (Government Delivery Index) as a measure of government performance and delivery, in alignment to the Party manifestos commitments.
18.
GDI Series
GDI Series
19.
overnance indices have several uses. They are used to; measure and guide budget process, improve service delivery (in terms of delivery modes and functions), enhance accountability and responsibility on the part of the office bearers. They introduce the discipline of relevant benchmarking, and improve the morale of Government officials and personnel, based on a set of standards, incentives, information and sanctions in the event of poor or non-delivery
This Background Note draws lessons for a methodology and process for Government Delivery Index (GDI) based on renowned Governance indices in Africa. It begins by providing a rationale for a single nationally accepted composite index to measure Government delivery. It further outlines sequenced steps for the GDI methodology and process. It concludes by recommending methodology and process options for developing the proposed GDI. Numerous government interventions have taken place towards ensuring delivery on its commitments, however, mechanisms to speed up the process must be in place. The Government Delivery Index, when constructed and implemented; will contribute to timely and relevant monitoring of government delivery commitments and progress, thus enhance transparency and accountability of policy implementation. The GDI will track to fill the gaps observed in the current Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used by Government. The GDI will be a very useful monitoring and evaluation tool for Government delivery and progress.
The following steps are often critical and standard ones followed are:
20.
Conceptualization
GDI Series
Internal brainstorming and initial visioning of core dimensions, subdimensions, indicators and data sources Identifying external resource, high-level technical people with global experience in developing indices to serve on the technical advisory group (TAG- external and professional peer review mechanism) Engage potential TAG and establish the TAG Develop theoretical / conceptual (overall) framework Prototyping and refining ( organizing stakeholder consultative forum Organize and expert consultative meeting Develop and pilot the index Collect data, analyze, and produce the report
Figure 1.
GDI Series
21.
How well do performance Indicators/ measures relate to each of the result packages?
Measurement of certain sectors output in other areas like defense, regulatory activities and social welfare programs remain elusive. For each concern (per sector) key measurable variables or indicators must be drawn up. The indicators must be reliable, replicable, and simple to interpret in order to be easily understood by all users, especially the general public. The indicators should focus more on outputs, outcomes and impacts that is; the process of enriching human life rather than just the richness of the economy in which Zambians live.
GDI Series
23.
Resource Mobilisation, management, utilisation Sub Category Indicator 1. Access to public resources and market based benefits Equity 2. Economic opportunities and social services 1. Mechanism for resource flow to the grassroots 2. Forms of resource flow 1. Involvement in budget allocation
Participatory budgeting
Weighting
Weighting is a mathematical process through which a selected dimensions or component of the index is assigned value. Weightings determine the relative importance of each component of the index. Most composite indicators rely on equal weighting (EW), i.e. all variables are given the same weight. In this approach all components of the index are assigned equal value or weights. Moreover, if variables are grouped into dimensions and those are further aggregated (grouped) into the composite, then applying equal weighting to the variables may imply an unequal weighting of the dimension (the dimensions grouping the larger number of variables will have higher weight). This could result in an unbalanced structure in the composite index. Weights are chosen to reflect the statistical quality of the data. Higher weights could be assigned to statistically reliable data with broad coverage. Aggregation methods vary depending on the model and framework being used. The linear aggregation method is useful when all individual indicators have the same measurement unit, provided that some mathematical properties are respected. To ensure that weights remain a measure of importance, accurate aggregation methods should be use.
24.
GDI Series
14 Sub categorise
4 Dimesnions
MO IBRAIM
GDI Series
25.
26.
GDI Series
Figure 5.
DIMENSIONS DIMENSIONS
DIMENSIONS
SUB-CATEGOTRIES
INDICATIONS
Illustration:- Structure for the GDI.
The structure of the GDI will draw from best practice and identify Dimensions (that encompass government delivery). The dimensions will be broken down into Sub categories (to accommodate different dimensions of government sectors and structures. The indicators shall be drawn that represent the basis of measurement for each of the detailed sub categories identified. Weights shall be attached to the indicators and these will define measurement. Finally, a clear graphical illustration of the GDI will be designed and piloted based on the consolidated formulation base and inclusive criteria.
CONCLUSION
Learning from best practice, the GDI is established on 3 pillars, namely: (a) Solid theoretical/ conceptual framework (b) A solid Theoretical framework (c) Good quality underlying data. It is important that good technical and stakeholder collaboration effects in preparation for the GDI in data collection, weights, and building towards relevance. In the final analysis, a collaborative agreement session involving key national government sectors, the technical groups, NGOs, and local academic institutions is most appropriate. The brainstorming sessions allow the institutions to capitalize on each other's strengths, thus presenting a consolidated, widely accepted Government Delivery Index.
GDI Series
27.
28.
GDI Series
KEY MESSAGES:
ultiple unaligned Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) frameworks in Zambia have led to ineffective evaluation, tracking and reporting of Government delivery efforts.
Government and Cooperating Partners (CPs) use different guiding frameworks, basing different projects, programmes and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).This affects the ability to monitor and track progress made by the government. The Sixth National Development Plan (SNDP) Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), the Vision 2030, the Yellow Book, Joint Assistant Strategy for Zambia II (JASZ II) and the PF Manifesto currently guide government delivery in Zambia but they are clearly not in alignment and harmony The question is; what document framework is Guiding Government Office bearers? An opportunity exists to utilize a harmonised Plan, as a basis for monitoring government performance. Better decision-making within government is enhanced as a result of monitoring public office bearers. It provides a forum for purposeful and concrete engagement between the executive, the legislatures and civil society around critical choices and outcomes. The Government Delivery Index (GDI) will help track and contribute to consensus based comprehensive monitoring feedback on delivery, and provide Government with the necessary feedback.
Summary
This Policy brief is towards methodological options and technical recommendations for the Government Delivery Index (GDI). Developing the index will draw simple methodological options and easy computation of weights. GDI will be based on assessment areas (commitments) from the PF
GDI Series
29.
governments manifesto. Technical recommendations towards filling policy gaps are then drawn. The GDI is being developed as a delivery monitoring, and progress reporting tool. Citizens have a right to know what the Government is doing in terms of delivery and what decisions the public office bearers make on their behalf towards development objectives and targets. The assessment findings of the SNDP analytical report, supports urgent need for a comprehensive standard M&E tool. For example, by the end of June 2012, the Government had released 76.6% of the Budget allocation with most of the ministries and spending agencies having received above 50% of their allocations, but many ministries did not meet KPI targets. Two questions arise; (1) are we really holding office bearers accountable? (2) Do SNDP KPIs really capture performance targets? It is paramount that a standard and cross-cutting M&E tool is formulated. This will track resource allocation, delivery, projects and policy performance, including support of results-based management. As a standard composite index, GDI will inform the Zambians and other stakeholders on how government is delivering on development commitments it made.
citizens and proper allocation of resources. Policy inclusions must foster citizens participation in decision-making at the national, regional and local levels. Legitimacy goes hand in hand with participation. The GDI, by going beyond input-output analysis, will direct government delivery to enrichment of the citizens. It will provide a sound basis for painting a comprehensive Government delivery picture and timely evidence-based feedback. This initiative recognizes Governments efforts towards developing a Government - Wide M&E framework based on select Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The value addition of GDI is its guide; where Government leadership will be adequately be consulted and engaged in identifying and ranking delivery priorities, consistent with their Party Manifesto and broader long-term vision.
Pre-existing Polices
Within Government, differences exist between the Sixth National Development Plan (SNDP), Medium Term-Expenditure Framework (MTEF), Public Expenditure and Financial Administration (PEFA) and each individual ministrys strategic plans. Individual ministries each have tailored strategic implementation plan.
Figure 1. Zambia Road to Development
Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia Millennium Development Goals Medium Term Expenditure Framework
Zambia's Guiding documents; one focal point but, are they in one alignment?
GDI Series
31.
The multiple M&E frameworks in Zambia have led to ineffective tracking, evaluation and reporting of Government delivery efforts in various sectors. The SNDP does not have an implementation plan. This has led to inconsistencies, as government does not have a standard way of monitoring and tracking progress being made under each ministry. This causes significant differences in data between Government and the Co-operating partners. Government is currently formulating the Government wide M&E framework. This mechanism focuses on input-output analysis in measuring Government delivery. The GDI goes beyond this notion and is concerned on measuring the impact of the government outcome deliverables and measuring the impact thereof, to the intended target groups.
32.
GDI Series
Process of data collection, standardization and computation of Grassroots Focused Index (GFI)
Guiding questions for the process of consultations, data collection and weighting To what extent have African governments and donors been able to prioritize Grassroots in development policy priorities and strategies? To what extent (where such prioritization has occurred) has prioritization led to effective channelling of resources to Grassroots development by African governments and donors? To what extent are Grassroots able to meaningfully influence government and donor policies and programs, including resource commitments and flows?
Since the GFI takes Grassroots as the starting point, primary research through the concept mapping methodology was used to engage with Grassroots communities and collect pilot data. The results of the concept mapping exercise were used to construct the components of the GFI, as well as to develop the rapid appraisal instrument that was used to conduct research. Two rapid appraisal instruments were designed one for community respondents and the other for development actors. The data collected from the rapid appraisal exercises was then coded and used to construct the GFI pilot results. The range of the indicators and dimensions falls within the 0 and 100 range, and all indicators were normalized in this way. A score of 50 indicates average focus, <50 poor focus, and >50 above average focus The overall GFI score is obtained by adding the average means of the three dimensions. Based on the lessons from the two indices, the starting point for the GDI concept is the commitments in the PF Manifesto (as basis for measurement) and how these guide Governments policy. The GDI focuses on how the Government is delivering on its Manifesto development commitments.
Figure 2. GFI
GFI
1/3
Government and Donor Responsibility Index
1/3
Resource Mobilisation management and utilization
1/3
Grassroots influence index
GDI Series
33.
The GDI methodology will engage a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and various stakeholders to enhance its wider appeal and standard. The conceptualisation, data collection and formulation process will obey the following steps: Identify potential members to the GDI Technical Advisory Group (TAG) A gap analysis of the PF manifesto commitments to assess feasibility Planning and conducting a GDI stakeholder consultative workshop Conducting the expert consultative meeting Engage the sector Minister, Permanent secretary or planning officer Pilot the GDI in one ministry Attaching of weights and standardization process Computing the final GDI score Report the GDI score in the respective sector.
Civil society organisations( research think-tanks, NGOs, Private sector interest organisations, and community-based organisations
34.
GDI Series
Central Statistics Office, as the Government-wide data and information repository Academia ( Statisticians)
3. The third step will be planning and holding an expert consultative meeting, for consultations and sequenced phase projects events. This will involve engagements with the identified Technical Advisory Group (TAG). This will be the advisory team to the PMRC GDI project team. This group will compose renowned professionals who are experienced with the formulation of governance indices. GDI data collection and computation. The GDI data collection phase will engage; the Sector Minister, Permanent secretary/ planning officer, stakeholders, consultations, government and report publications, sector institutions. The computation will be based on adding sub totals of the 3 dimensions weights (validation) Release and dissemination of data; after the computation and analysis of final GDI score, a graphical illustration will be used to represent the findings.
35.
Outputs: the final products, goods and services produced for delivery. Outputs will be defined as what has been produced. Outcomes: the medium-term results for specific beneficiaries which are the consequence of achieving specific outputs. Outcomes should relate clearly to ministries strategic goals and objectives set out in its plans. Impacts: the results of achieving specific outcomes, such as; reducing poverty and creating jobs. Impacts will capture how the results have influenced communities, general citizenry and target groups.
DIMENSIONS
SCORE
OUT OF 10 Total/10
WEIGHTINGS
PROCESS Weight
OUTPUT Weight
OUTCOME Weight
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
Weighting for the GDI will be established after consultations and engagement with the Minister, permanent secretary and technical advisory group. Different indicators will be attached various weights, based on their rating and overall relevance to achieving the delivery goal. The 3 dimensions weights should add up to 10 and the final GDI score will be computed by adding the sub totals and averaging the values.
CONCLUSION
The GDI provides an integrated, standard M&E tool; with principles, practices and standards to be used throughout Government, as a consolidated monitoring and progress tracking tool. Governments major challenge is to become more effective. GDI will assist the public sector in tracking and evaluating its performance and identifying the factors which contribute to its service delivery outcomes. The index is uniquely oriented towards providing users with the ability to draw causal connections between the choice of policy priorities, the resourcing of those policy objectives, the programmes designed to implement them, the services actually delivered and their ultimate impact on communities. The tool will assist to provide an evidence base for public resource allocation decisions and help identify how challenges should be addressed and successes replicated. The case therefore is for the government to adhere to the methodological options outlined in this policy brief, as we build towards a
GDI Series
37.
38.
GDI Series
efore the 2011 Parliamentary and General Elections, the Patriotic Front (PF) Party made several commitments, which are outlined in its Party Manifesto 2011-2016. Now, as the Party in Government Zambians expect it to timely and adequately deliver its development commitments. Numerous questions are being asked about how the PF is translating its commitments to tangible policy, programmatic and regulatory reform initiatives to influence Government-wide implementation and achievement of objective targets. In order to regularly obtain feedback on the progress being made towards achieving PF Governments goals and objectives, and timely communicate the achievements, a sound, single, consolidated and widely accepted Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) tool should be utilized. The focus of every process of development implementation and delivery is allowing timely reflection of critical questions in order to take timely corrective action in the event of a mission-drift: Are we taking the action we said we would take? Are we making progress on achieving the results we said we wanted to achieve? Are the results relevant to the intended target group? What changes, if any, are intended to attribute our actions to? Can these results last long enough to have last effects on the changes made? How do we document these achievements? How do intended beneficiary and stakeholder segments know when progress is made and results achieved?
The standard tool should have wider value and appeal and ensure effective and transparent communication flow of progress and achievements of Government on its manifesto and overall national strategy objectives. This is the basis of
GDI Series
39.
Policy Monitoring and Research Centres (PMRC) support thus managing development results for greater accountability and transparency in public service delivery mechanisms and among the public duty bearers. To realize the vision of a single standard monitoring tool of Government development delivery and marry it to with effective system of timely, transparent communication of progress and achievements, PMRC is in the process of developing a composite Government Delivery Index (GDI). The PMRCs proposal to develop the GDI builds on an identified need for Zambia to narrow information variances brought about by use if multiple M&E framework by developing a single, independent and consolidated Government delivery Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework. Unlike the Government-wide KPI, this proposal seeks to tie together key elements of the results chain-from: Activities Inputs, Processes, Outputs; Outcomes
Government M&E framework focuses on input-output analysis, the PMRC GDI, by going beyond input-output analysis, will include processes, inputs and outcomes. It will provide a sound basis for painting a comprehensive Government delivery picture and timely and relevant evidence-based feedback. This initiative recognizes and builds on the current Governments efforts towards developing a Government - Wide Monitoring and Evaluation System (GWMES) based on select Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The value addition that GDI brings to the table is its niche of giving the opportunity for the Government leadership to adequately be consulted and involved in identifying and ranking delivery priorities consistent with their Party Manifesto and broader long-term vision. The opportunity for developing the GDI is further strengthened by the current need for more harmonized policy strategies and M&E approaches within Government, Co-operating Partners, the Patriotic Front Manifesto and civil society organisations. The starting point for the GDI concept is the commitments in the PF Manifesto (as basis for measurement) and how these guide Governments policy. The GDI focuses on how the Government is delivering on its Manifesto development commitments.
and Financial Administration (PEFA) and each individual ministrys strategic plans. The SNDP outlines KPIs for every ministry, but lacks a clear implementation plan of projects and programmes. This affects the ability to monitor and evaluate the progress being made by government. It is not very clear how the PF Manifesto is being interpreted and used to influence and guide Government policies. Similarly, it is perceived that Co-operating partners use their own approaches to benchmark Government delivery. Notably, co-operating partners reference frames are; the SNDP M&E framework and the Joint Assistance Strategy for Zambia (JASZ II). This has resulted in significant differences in data between CSO, Government and civil society organisations. These differences are a significant concern not only for reporting, but also planning and monitoring purposes. This qualifies the urgent need towards harmonized key strategic documents for Zambia (SNDP, MTEF, JASZ, PF Manifesto, and Ministry Strategic Plans), and also the related M&E frameworks. The GDI therefore is proposed as a composite index, whose formulation will be guided by best practice of developing indicator framework. This will enhance and promote its wider appeal, use and sustainability as a tool for tracking government delivery.
GDI Series
41.
Process
Output
Impact
42.
GDI Series
II. The second step will involve planning and conducting a GDI stakeholder consultative workshop. This meeting will target key stakeholder segments who are potential users of data and beneficiaries as follows: Government departments, especially the policy planning, implementation and M&E units Multilateral and bilateral development institutions and agencies Government, Local Government and parastatals Civil society organisations( research think-tanks, NGOs, Private sector interest organisations, and community-based organisations Central Statistics Office, as the Government-wide data and information repository Academia ( Statisticians) A GDI concept note, outlining the key guiding questions, policy rationale and strategy for GDI and its proposed structure, will be developed and presented during the stakeholder consultative meeting as a background and discussion document. The rationale for holding this meeting will be to identify opportunities and potential risks in the wider environment for developing the GDI, promote consensus and gain wider appeal and value for the tool proposed tool. This will ensure it is continuously used and thus; is an important strategy for sustaining the impact and wider use of the tool. The third step will be the expert consultative meeting, for consultations and sequenced phase of events.
GDI Series
43.
1.4.2.1 Weighting
Weighting for the GDI will be established after consultations and engagement with the technical advisory group. Different indicators will be attached various weights, based on their rating and overall relevance to achieving the delivery goal.
1.4.2.2 Dimensions
For every sector, the Manifesto commitments will be clearly outlined and each mandated to input process, output result and final outcome. For the GDI, the dimensions for each sector commitments will be process, output and outcome. The Indicators, for every commitment will be the intended target and outcome measure planned by the Government.
Figure1. (The GDI Framework)
DIMENSIONS DIMENSIONS
DIMENSIONS
SUB-CATEGOTRIES
INDICATIONS
The structure of the GDI will draw from best practice and identify Dimensions (that encompass government delivery). For Every Sector, the commitments will be outlined and then 3 dimensions defined and analysed. Dimension 1- Process Dimension 2- Output Dimension 3- Outcome
44.
GDI Series
Overall target
Scale :( 0, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%) The big outer white circle represents the overall sector. The small black circle shows what has been done. In this example, we see how the GDI in a sector may look like, if no major delivery has taken place. This may be a 10% score The white circle represents the overall sector. The black circle shows what has been done. In this example, we see how the GDI in a sector may look like, if major delivery has taken place. This may be a 98% score.
DIMENSIONS
SCORE
OUT OF 10 Total/10
WEIGHTINGS
PROCESS Weight
OUTPUT Weight
OUTCOME Weight
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
GDI Series
45.
One ministry or sector will be evaluated per time. Assessment areas will be drawn from the Manifesto, outlined as commitments. The Weightings will be attached to each assessment area based on its overall importance/ rating towards achieving the total objective in that sector. The 3 dimensions for each assessment must add up to 10. The measurement scale is therefore 1-10 For each assessment area, weights will be attached for process, output and outcome. The total GDI score will be computed by adding the sub totals and computing the average. The Minister or Permanent Secretary will be engaged to determine what is being done for every assessment area. After weights have been attached, the GDI will be subjected to a team of experts, to validate and analyse the scores. This will pass through a stakeholders consultative meeting and general public for more views and reviews
46.
GDI Series
GDI Series
47.
Unlocking Zambia's Potential Correspondence on this Series can be sent to: info@pmrczambia.net Policy Monitoring and Research Centre (PMRC) Plot No. 32 Sable Road, corner Bishop and Sable Roads, Kabulonga, Lusaka, Zambia Private Bag KL 10 Tel: +260 211 268 385 | +260 979 015 660 www.pmrczambia.org
48.
GDI Series