Zipar End of Project Evaluation Report

End-of Project Evaluation-Zambia Institute of Policy and Research
End of Project Evaluation of the Zambia

Institute for Policy Analysis and Research
(ZIPAR) Capacity Building Project
FINALREPORT
Submitted by Daniel Andoh

March 2015
daniel@cicadaconsult.com
1
Table of Contents
Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................ 3
Executive Summary................................................................................................................................. 4
Section 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 9
Purpose of End of Project Evaluation ................................................................................................... 10
Scope of Work ....................................................................................................................................... 10
SECTION 2: Methodology...................................................................................................................... 11
Limitations of the Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 12
SECTION 3: Analysis and Key Findings ................................................................................................. 13
3.1 Project Implementation ......................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Project Governance and Management .................................................................................. 13
3.3 Project Performance .............................................................................................................. 14
RELEVANCE ................................................................................................................................... 17
EFFICIENCY .................................................................................................................................... 19
IMPACT ......................................................................................................................................... 23
SUSTAINABILITY............................................................................................................................ 27
LESSONS ........................................................................................................................................ 29
RECOMMENDATION..................................................................................................................... 29
ANNEX........................................................................................................................................... 32
Content of Tables and Figures
Figure 1: ZIPAR Project Evaluation Process .......................................................................................... 11

Figure 2 Project Implementation Milestones ....................................................................................... 16
Figure 3: Organisational life Cycle.............................................................................................................
Table 1: Programme Budget Performance ........................................................................................... 20
Table 2. Qualitative Assessment of Performance of Project Objectives .............................................. 21
Table 3: Performance of key Deliverables ............................................................................................ 22
Table 4: Assessment of Pre-Mid-term Evaluation Risk ......................................................................... 27
2
Acronyms
ACBF African Capacity Building Foundation
AWPBs Annual Work Plan and Budgets
CDF Constituency Development Fund
CTPD Centre for Trade Policy and Development
CSO Central Statistical Office
DANIDA Danish International Development Agency
DFID Department for International Development
DMPA Directorate of Macroeconomic Policy Analysis
EAZ Economic Association of Zambia
ED Executive Director
EPM Economic Policy Management
FSDP Financial Sector Development Programme
GBP Great Britain Pound
GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia
IGC International Growth Centre
IT Information Technology
JC Jesuits Centre
JCTR Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection
JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency
MA Masters of Arts
MCTI Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoFNP Ministry of Finance &National Planning
MoF Ministry of Finance
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
MTR Mid-Term Review
MTWSC Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication
NEAC National Economic Advisory Council
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NRFA National Road Fund Agency
OECD-DAC Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – Development Assistance
Committee
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
PC Programme Coordinator
PS Permanent Secretary
RA Research Associate
SC Steering Committee
SRF Senior Research Fellow
RF Research Fellow
TC Technical Committee
TOR Terms of Reference
UNZA University of Zambia
WB World Bank
ZACCI Zambia Chamber of Commerce and Industry
ZDA Zambia Development Agency
ZNBC Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation
ZIPAR Zambia Institute of Policy Analysis and Research
3
Executive Summary
This report presents the findings from the End of Project Evaluation of Zambia Institute for Policy
Research and Analysis (ZIPAR) Capacity Building Project. The intervention was an outcome of a
collaborative engagement between the African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF), the Government
of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ), the Netherlands, Norway and other development partners (DFID and
DANIDA came on board later).
Driven by the need to enhance economic governance and policy impacts, the ZIPAR project sought to
strengthen capacity for policy formulation, implementation and monitoring in Zambia. It sought to do
this by establishing a semi-autonomous policy institute under the Ministry of Finance and National
Planning (MoFNP). This institute was to promote economic policy research and analysis and stimulate
stakeholder participation and inclusion in the policy processes in Zambia. The project also aimed to
create space for evidence-based policy debate and engagement among different actors such as the
general public, private sector, academia, NGOs and media. The project was to provide tailor-made
training and technical support to policy-making stakeholders.
The project was approved during the 31st regular meeting of the ACBF Executive Board held on May
5-6, 2004 in Harare Zimbabwe and was envisioned to be implemented for four years. However with
numerous start-up challenges it culminated in major reform and restructuring of the project in 2009.
Recommendations from the midterm review conducted on May 2012, extended the project
completion date from 28 February 2010 to 31 August 2014. In August 2014 an additional four months
was requested by ZIPAR to enable it round up its activities and conduct the final external audit of the
project, pushing the end date to 31 December 2014.
This evaluation was aimed at providing an independent, systematic, and objective assessment of the
overall performance of the project including a review of the design, implementation and extent of
achievement of intended results. The evaluation assessed the institutional capability and relevance of
ZIPAR in supporting policy-making in Zambia. Further, the assessment sought to identify and
document design and implementation gaps, opportunities for delivery and impact enhancement of
the institution and results stories. The evaluation covered the entire implementation period of the
project from the date of effectiveness to the final completion date of 31st December 2014.
Methodology
The evaluation adopted a multi-faceted approach that ensured that all relevant stakeholders,
including target beneficiaries were fully involved in the process. It mapped out the key issues
delineated in the ToR and structured the analysis in line with the OECD/DAC evaluation criteria. The
assessment aimed to capture stakeholder perspective and feedback to ascertain the key results
achieved by the project. As per the ToR, the assessment sought to answer the evaluation questions in
line with the 5 OECD/DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and
sustainability. The evaluation adopted a transparent, inclusive, participatory and utilization-focused
approach to collect, analyse and report on evaluation findings and recommendations. Where outcome
and impact level data was lacking, the evaluation assessed the extent to which the project had
contributed to the achievement of higher level policy results. The evaluation used a mixed methods
approach, drawing on primary and secondary data, as well as quantitative and qualitative data to
come up with an overall assessment backed by clear evidence and results stories.
4
Findings
Despite the initial hitches that resulted in start delays
and subsequent restructuring in 2009, it can be
“It is great to see ZIPAR engaging on issues and
concluded that to a large extent, the ZIPAR project
communicating it in an accessible fashion” Chola
managed to achieve its objectives. The intervention
Mukanga- author of the Zambia Economist Blog
logic and value preposition of the project were found
to be valid and relevant. The establishment of the
institute has played a key role in increasing access and uptake of research-based evidence for policy
making in Zambia as well as creating spaces for stakeholder participation in the national policy
processes.
In terms of efficiency, ZIPAR has used the grant resources efficiently due to the robust governance
and oversight by the Steering Committee and its sub-committees as well as the implementation and
financial management support provided by ACBF. Over seventy-five (75%) of the grant was allocated
and used for programme activities. Furthermore, the Institute has demonstrated a high awareness of
its environment and the ability to adjust to optimise its capacity and value. ZIPAR has established a
reputation for delivering quality work with a good turnaround time and at a reasonable cost. This is
evidenced by the increased demand for commissioned research by its clients.
With regards to effectiveness, the project has significantly achieved its broader objective of improving
economic governance in Zambia through enhancement of capacity for effective economic policy
research formulation, analysis and management. All the stakeholders interviewed corroborated that
ZIPAR is a “value addition” to the country’s policy dynamics and the broader development process.
The institute has generated a number of studies that have been used by government, ministries, local
government councils and other actors in their policy-making work. As a semi-autonomous policy
research institute, ZIPAR has emerged as a key player and a trustworthy source of relevant and quality
research-based information for policy-making in Zambia. The institute has been effective in straddling
the divide of gaining trust of its clients and enhancing its credibility with public sector, private sector,
civil society and the donor community. ZIPAR’s work is underpinned by a team experts and associates
who are knowledgeable and conversant with the country’s policy environment. This enables the
institute to provide fit-for-purpose technical and advisory services to their clients. The effectiveness
of ZIPAR’s products and services in contributing to the policy discourse in Zambia was established by
the increased request for the institute’s commentaries and submissions on topical policy
issues/debates from government ministries, departments and agencies as well as the legislators.
Although not much impact was made at the early stages of the project, ZIPAR was transformed in
2011 and has since made significant contribution to the policy value chain in Zambia. Through its
research products and technical services, the institute has increased stakeholder access to timely,
relevant and quality research-based information which has added value to the country’s policy
outcomes. ZIPAR has helped to increase the participation and engagement of non-state actors in the
national policy processes. ZIPAR’s participatory approaches has also contributed to stakeholder buy-
in and increased utilisation of research-based evidence for decision making. The evaluation findings
also revealed that ZIPAR has affected and influenced the policy dialogue environment in the country
by bringing research-based evidence to the table through its media briefing, policy debates and other
engagements with stakeholders. Stakeholders interviewed indicated that no institution was doing
what ZIPAR is doing now, not even the academia. They indicated that the Institute is unique and the
value of its products have attracted a number of high profile persons.
Examples of some of the impacts of ZIPAR’s policy research activities include:
• Influence on monetary policy in Zambia
5
• Interface and engagement with high level government and Parliament officials
• Engagement with Non-state Actors
• Capacity Building and Training
The long term sustainability of ZIPAR was a concern to many stakeholders interviewed. They were not
sure whether the institute will be able to operate at the same level or better without ACBF and other
donors support. Whereas this evidence underpins the relevance of ACBF’s support to the institute, it
throws light on the issue of financial sustainability which needs urgent attention. ZIPAR is largely
dependent on donor and government support for its operations and programmes. In addition, the
institute does not have a robust sustainability and resource mobilisation strategy especially targeting
funding from the private sector and non-traditional partners as well as a clearly agreed exit strategy
with its current donors including ACBF.
Notwithstanding the achievements detailed above, the project encountered a number of challenges
that affected the implementation progress and the magnitude of results achieved. Some challenges
include:
• Inadequate consultation with stakeholders and delayed effectiveness of the projects: Evidence
from the assessment showed that with the exception of some key government agencies
almost all the private sector and civil society actors who currently interact and collaborate
with ZIPAR were not engaged during project design.
• Initial suspicion and mistrust of non-state actors: evidence gathered from stakeholders
showed that the integration of the Institute within and as an appendage of the Ministry of
Finance and National Planning at the early stages of its establishment created initial suspicion
and mistrust of the intent and independence ZIPAR.
• Inadequate budget for policy advocacy: The design did not allocate adequate resources for
policy advocacy and engagements with non-state actors.
• Too much focus on the public sector: The design leaned more towards the public sector in
terms of the project deliverables. There was inadequate focus on non-state actors.
• Lack of a clearly defined sustainability strategy: It became evident from the review that from
the onset not enough emphasis was given to activities that would provide ZIPAR with a robust
sustainability/exit strategy.
Lessons Learnt
From inception there should be a well-defined and clearly laid out institutional framework. A clear
institutional framework must be well-envisioned and positioned for the institution to be able to chart
its course systematically. Resources – financial and other material must be well planned for and
provided as and when needed or planned for. The early part of the project suffered from this situation
where providers of resources were not fulfilling their part.
Curtailed policy impact due to inadequate funding for advocacy and stakeholder engagement.
Although ZIPAR has helped to stimulate policy debate based on evidence and to enhance utilisation
of research based information for policy making in Zambia, it was realised that more could have been
achieved should there have been a clearly defined strategy and adequate resources for publicising the
activities of the institute through to the grass root levels and to engage the different actors along the
policy value chain. An example of this situation was on research conducted by ZIPAR targeted at
transport owners, drivers etc. The outcome of the research was disseminated to government
ministries, departments and agencies as well as donors but not disseminated to transport owners,
6
associations, drivers, spare parts dealers etc. partly because there were no earmarked funds to
customise the outputs and conduct grassroots’ advocacy.
On hindsight the project could have benefited from some internal soft skills training activities built
into the project for ZIPAR personnel. The project did not accommodate soft skills such as team-
building, lobbying and advocacy, coaching and mentoring, proposal writing and resource mobilisation
that have been identified as critical for the institutes to achieve its strategic objective and to stay
relevant over time.
Delayed recruitment impacted negatively on the timeliness and quality of delivery of the project
outputs at the early stages. Recruitment and development of conditions of service commensurable
with the market rates in Zambia should have been given the needed attention at the early stages to
ensure that most capable staff were recruited and retained
Lack of clearly defined sustainability strategy and exit plan has a negative effect on ZIPARs
independence and ability to focus on the future without spreading too thin. An effective sustainability
strategy and exit plan will enable the institute to balance its effort in terms of its investment in core
and commission research and other policy engagements. It was evident that a clear forecasting of
resource availability for the future will further enhance ZIPAR’s ability to provide a more targeted
support to the policy process and impacts in Zambia.
Recommendations
The following steps, derived from the findings of the evaluation are recommended;
1. ZIPAR should increase its engagement with the private sector. ZIPAR has succeeded and
done well in enhancing the policy research formulation and analysis capabilities in
government, civil society and academia. However, much more needs to be done to
mainstream the private sector into the policy process in Zambia in terms of building their skills
and competencies to effectively engage and provide policy options. It is recommended that
ZIPAR engages more strongly with the private sector issues.
2. It is recommended that going forward there is need for ZIPAR to increase the provision of
hands-on short-term training for the key stakeholders to enhance their capability to access
and use the research products. This support among others will improve its visibility and
vertical engagement with stakeholders across the policy making value chain.
3. ZIPAR should develop and implement strategies that will enhance its independence and
effective governance. To lessen the risk of external influence over the governance and
management of ZIPAR, sustainable institutional arrangements and processes must be
adopted to further insulate ZIPAR in terms of appointing authority and sustenance of
government subvention.
4. It is recommended that ZIPAR improves its outreach and visibility especially to the rural areas
and to expand its policy research to stakeholders beyond Zambia. ZIPAR initially focused
predominantly on satisfying public sector/ national research however having now established
its credentials, it is recommended that ZIPAR position itself to bid for and conduct research
with regional focus especially for bilateral and multilaterals stakeholders. This effort can also
contribute to the relevance and financial sustainability of the institute.
5. It is recommended that ZIPAR endeavor to attract and retain highly qualified staff by
developing and implementing a scheme of services which defines a career path within ZIPAR
and caters for the regular upgrading of skills and capacity of staff. This is to stimulate long
term commitment of staff and to reduce staff turnover.
7
6. There is need to expand or re-locate to a more spacious office that can accommodate all the
required staff. The current office space is optimized, no additional personnel can be taken on
board. ZIPAR is urged to chart a growth strategy which caters for increased personnel.
7. It is recommended that ZIPAR improves its resource mobilization effort by developing and
implementing a clear strategy including partnerships, promoting subscription for its research
products and consultancy services in research and tailor-made short term training. The reason
being that, notwithstanding the goodwill and collaboration with other institutions the
financing landscape in Zambia still remains a challenge. ZIPAR should therefore expand its
partnership and networking to include non-traditional donors and local actors to improve
its relevance and sustainability
Conclusion
ZIPAR has gained respect and recognition as a preferred policy research institute in Zambia. The
institute is now overwhelmed with requests from many organisations. The institute has demonstrated
its capabilities to provide quality, relevant and timely policy research information to enable its
stakeholders to make informed decisions and to make strategic policy choices. ZIPAR has contributed
to effective stakeholder engagement and inclusion of non-state actors in the national policy processes.
The public, private and civil society actors including the media described ZIPAR as a reliable and
preferred source for evidence-based policy research information. Most of the stakeholders
interviewed anticipated a more intensive participation and contribution of ZIPAR to policy discourse
and debates in Zambia and to continue to chart the course of making research-based evidence the
fulcrum of policy decisions and engagement in the country.
It can be argued that ZIPAR has emerged as key player in the policy value chain in Zambia. The institute
has bridged the gap in policy-making in the country by increasing stakeholder access to quality,
relevant and timely research-based evidence. It has enhanced utilisation of policy research
information by promoting inclusive and evidence based policy engagements and discourse among
stakeholders. It has improved the receptive capacity of key actors through the conduct of tailor made
and hands on training in policy research formulation and analysis. Through effective leadership,
enhanced collaboration and engagement, ZIPAR is promoting a culture of “letting the research data
and evidence speak for itself”.
In conclusion, the challenge ahead for ZIPAR is in consolidating the gains and sustaining the
momentum. One cannot discount the technical and supportive role of ACBF, DANIDA, Norway, DFID
and the Government of Zambia in facilitating the establishment and operationalization of the project.
8
Section 1. Introduction
The Zambia Institute of Policy Analysis and Research (ZIPAR) project was an a outcome of a
collaborative engagement between the African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF), the
Governments of Zambia, the Netherlands and Norway 1 aimed at strengthening policy research and
analysis capabilities of state and non-state actors Zambia. The project was developed in response to
the dearth of capacity for economic policy research and analysis, weak receptor capacity and
inadequate stakeholder participation in the public policy process in Zambia. The ZIPAR project
therefore, sought to improve capacity for evidence-based policy-making in the country by establishing
a semi-autonomous policy institute under the Ministry of Finance and National Planning (MFNP). The
institute was to promote economic policy research and analysis and stimulate stakeholder
participation and inclusion in policy processes in Zambia. The project also aimed at creating space for
evidence-based policy debate and engagement among the different actors such as; the public sector,
the private sector, NGOs and the media and to provide tailor-made training/technical support to these
stakeholders. These activities were aimed at engendering increased uptake and utilisation of research
information for the policy-making activities of the beneficiaries sectors and institutions.
In line with the goal of contributing to improved economic governance and impacts of economic
policies in Zambia, the project focused on strengthening stakeholder capacity in economic policy
formulation, implementation, and monitoring underpinned by the following specific objectives:
• Enhance the policy process in Zambia by establishing a semi-autonomous economic policy and
research institute that will provide quality, relevant and timely economic policy research,
analysis and advice government and other stakeholders.
• Improve skills and competencies of government, private sector and civil society officials in
policy analysis and management for effective conduct and utilization of policy research
information for evidence based policy making in Zambia and:
• Increase participation of the private sector and civil society in the policy making,
implementation and monitoring process in Zambia by creating dialogue “spaces” for policy
engagement.
The Executive Board of ACBF in 2004 approved a grant of One Million Five Hundred Thousand United
States Dollars (USD 1.5 million) for the implementation of the ZIPAR Capacity building project
representing 37% of the total project cost of 4 million US Dollars. The Government of Zambia was to
provide USD 1,000,000 (25%) and the Netherlands and Norway were to provide USD 1,500,000
(37.5%). Despite initial start-up challenges and delays in implementation, the project effectively took
off in 2010.
ZIPAR (the semi-autonomous policy institute) was established on 14 October 2006 under the Society’s
Act through a joint agreement between the Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ) and the
African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF). Despite initial delays and implementation challenges,
the institute has emerged as a legitimate and trusted source of quality research-based evidence and
a key driver of policy discourse in Zambia.
The delay in project start up resulted in grant extension with adjustment of the implementation
schedule and extension of the end date of the project from 2010 to 31st August 2014. A mid-term
review was conducted on May 22, 2012 which provided ACBF, ZIPAR and other stakeholders with an
appreciation of the progress of implementation and the level of achievement of intended results. It
also identified and documented key implementation challenges and recommended ways of keeping
the project on track as well as achieving intended results.
1
DFID and Danish government later came on board to support
9
In line with the evaluation requirements of ACBF, the project was selected to be evaluated by an
independent consultant. The consultant was to assess progress of implementation of agreed activities
and recommendations from the MTR, the level of achievement of intended results (outputs, outcome,
and impacts) and the sustainability of ZIPAR after the end of the project. The evaluation was also to
delineate challenges and lessons that will inform future programming.
Purpose of End of Project Evaluation
The aim of this evaluation was to provide an independent, systematic, and objective assessment of
the overall performance of the ZIPAR Project including a review of the design, implementation and
level of achievement of intended results. It is also intended to assess the institutional capability and
relevance of ZIPAR in supporting policy making in Zambia. Further, the evaluation is expected to
identify and document design and implementation gaps, results stories, and opportunities for
enhancing the delivery and impact of the institution.
Scope of Work
The evaluation assessed, as systematic and objectively as possible the relevance and fulfilment of the
objectives of the ZIPAR project, its efficiency and effectiveness in implementing planned activities and
achieve intended results, gauge the impact of the project and the sustainability of the institution after
the end of project. It covers the entire implementation period of the project from the date of
effectiveness to the completion or end date 31st August 2014, and is required to capture the views
and perspectives of key clients and users of ZIPARs products and services such as public, private, NGO
sector practitioners and the donor community in Zambia.
10
SECTION 2: Methodology
The evaluation adopted a multi-faceted approach that ensured that all key stakeholders including
target beneficiaries were fully involved in the process. It mapped out the key issues delineated in the
TOR and structured the analysis in line with the OECD/DAC evaluation criteria. It focused very much
on stakeholder perspective and feedback to ascertain the key results achieved by the project.
As per the TOR, the assessment sought to answer the evaluation questions in line with the 5
OECD/DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. The
evaluation adopted a transparent, inclusive, participatory and utilization-focused approach to collect,
analyse and report on evaluation findings and recommendations. It assessed the rationale and
justification for the project, as well as the outputs, outcomes and impacts achieved. The evaluation
also appraised the sustainability of the intervention including mechanisms and strategies put in place
to ensure that the benefits transcend the end of ACBF grant. Taking into account the factors (external
and internal) that may have affected the design, implementation and impacts of the ZIPAR project,
the evaluation proposed strategies that could enhance the delivery and impact of the policy research
institute going forward. Where outcome and impact level data was lacking, the evaluation assessed
the extent to which the project has contributed to the achievement of higher level policy results.
The evaluation used a mixed methods approach, drawing on primary and secondary, quantitative and
qualitative data to come up with an overall assessment backed by clear evidence. Results stories and
case studies were also developed to compliment quantitative data collected on outcomes and impacts
from targeted beneficiaries. This included feedback from ZIPAR’s client /beneficiaries on the effect of
the institute’s products and services (research, training and policy engagement activities) on their
knowledge, understanding, skills and ability to effectively participate in national policy discourse.
The evaluation followed a four stepped approach in 1) organise evaluation, 2) Get the facts,3) Begin
analysis and 4) Reach conclusions as delineated in the diagram 1 below.
Figure 1: ZIPAR Project Evaluation Process
1. Clarify processes and 2. Identify “ZIPAR” target

Organise
participation aspects of organisations/groups and key
evaluation
evaluation stakeholders
3. Identify changes 4. Identify 5. Identify changes 6. Assess

in outcome for changes in in inputs / resources changes in
Get the facts beneficiaries and project target of ZIPAR targets efficiency and
other stakeholders organisations organisations effectiveness
7. Identify significant 8. Identify all research/policy support 9. Identify strategic basis

Begin factors which explain activities internally and externally for ZIPAR project (process,
Analyses changes in outputs which influenced significant factors leadership and
and outcomes identified in step 7 commitment)
Reach 10. Assess extent to which 11. Assess technical 12. Extract lessons learned
Conclusions economic policy changes can institutional and financial from partner organisation(s),
be attributed to “ZIPAR” sustainability of policy and donor(s) key stakeholders
project output changes
Desk Review and drafting of inception report: Five days after contract signing, an inception report
was developed based on the background documents and project information provided by ACBF and
ZIPAR. Key documents such as the Grant agreement, the project Mid-Term Review Report, quarterly
and annual progress Reports, Aid memoirs and other relevant documents. The Inception report among
11
others captured the consultants understanding of the assignment, proposed approach and
methodology as well as a work plan detailing the scheduling of the key components and deliverables.
Field data collection: The field data collection spanned 4th November to 14 November 2014. It started
with kick-off/validation workshop with ZIPAR staff and ACBF team to agree on the evaluation
requirements and to finalise among others the evaluation methodology, data collection instruments,
work plan and interview schedules and protocols. After the workshop, the consultant engaged the
relevant stakeholders’ including internal (ZIPAR Steering Committee and staff) and external (public,
private, civil society, media and development partners) to collect data on the key variables of the
evaluation. The process included, face-to-face and telephone interviews with key informant, focus
group discussions, administering of questionnaires where appropriate.in Overall sixty nine (69) people
comprising of heads of government ministries, NGOs, media houses, academia and the development
community were interviewed.
Among others, the following participatory methodologies and tools were used during the evaluation:
(i) Key informant Interviews with people with closely associated with the project
(ii) Emailed questionnaires to stakeholders who would not be within reach of data
collection
(iii) One-on one interview sessions with representatives of selected project beneficiaries
and implementers especially focused on policy issues within the government, private
sector and civil society
(iv) Focus group discussions where appropriate for beneficiaries (end users)
(v) Semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and project partners
Validation of initial findings: The initial findings from the field data collection and document review
were analysed and shared with key stakeholders. A quick feedback session was organised with ZIPAR
management and staff to validate the initial finding and to identify areas for further assessment. ZIPAR
staff and the ACBF focal point was further contacted by e-mail and Skype to discuss and secure
additional information and feedback on the initial outcomes of the assessment.
Documentation and Reporting
Data, information and results stories gathered through desk review and field assessment has been
analysed and incorporated into this evaluation report. The report covers all the key dimensions of the
evaluation in line with the table of content proposed in the TOR.
Limitations of the Evaluation

Due to the long gestation period of the project, some key stakeholders who were involved in the early
consultations prior to the effectiveness of the project especially from the government side could not
be traced for their perspective and comments on the design phase of the project.
The sudden death of the President of the republic of Zambia coincided with the data collection phase
of the evaluation. The tragic incidence as well as a preponderance of official functions made it difficult
securing appointments and follow-ups with public sector officials and other stakeholders.
The anticipated validation workshop involving the entire key stakeholders could not be organised due
to the unforeseen occurrence and other time bound activities that required a reasonable number of
ZIPAR staff to be in the field.
12
SECTION 3: Analysis and Key Findings

This section of the report covers the key findings of the evaluation. The report begins with a summary
of the progress of implementation of the project including strategic reforms and adjustments of key
deliverables and timelines. It details the key findings across the 5 evaluation dimensions as well as
highlights of stakeholder perception and feedback on the relevance and value of the project.
3.1 Project Implementation
The ZIPAR project was designed against the backdrop of limited local capacity for research and policy
analysis within GRZ and other stakeholders to facilitate effective design and implementation of
macroeconomic policies and programmes. The project sought to improve economic governance in
Zambia through enhanced capacity of the public, private and civil society in policy formulation,
implementation and monitoring.
The immediate objectives of the project were as follows, to: i) establish a semi-autonomous economic
policy and research institute, ii) provide training to government officials, iii) conduct research in areas
of economic policy formulation and management, iv) provide policy advice to government and
promote policy dialogue within Zambia through dissemination workshops, conferences and
publications
The ACBF Executive Board approved a grant of One million Five Hundred Thousand United States
Dollars (US$1, 500, 000) for implementation of the ZIPAR project during its 31st Regular Meeting from
5-7 May 2004 in Harare-Zimbabwe. The Grant Agreement was signed on 23rd August 2005, declared
effective on 19th November 2007 after fulfilling all the conditions precedent to effectiveness and was
officially launched on 27th November 2009 by the then Minister of Finance and National Planning.
The protracted project implementation delay after grant approval/signing led to ACBF and the project
promoters restructuring the project in 2009. Consequently, the project closing date was extended
from 28th February 2010 to 31st August 2014 to ensure effective implementation of activities and
achievement of results.
3.2 Project Governance and Management

As part of the implementation mechanism, ZIPAR established a robust governance system in line with
the provisions of the Grant Agreement. The system has three main governance organs comprising of
a Steering Committee (SC), Technical Committee (TC) 2and Project Management Team (PMT). The
project governance structure had clearly defined roles and responsibilities:
Steering Committee: The Steering Committee were the primary governance organ of the project with
oversight of the operations of ZIPAR to ensure adherence to its objectives. In this oversight role, the
Steering Committee was responsible for the approval of annual work plans and budgets, and
publications and reports; recruitment and evaluation of project staff; and selection of the auditor(s)
of the Institute’s accounts. The committee was appointed by the Secretary to the Treasury, Ministry
of Finance and comprised nine (9) members from Government, academia, the private sector and civil
society as follows:
• Permanent Secretary – Economic Management and Finance, Ministry of Finance;
• Permanent Secretary – Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry;
• Permanent Secretary – Policy Analysis and Coordinating Division, Cabinet Office;
• Director – Economics Department, Bank of Zambia;
• President – Zambia Chamber of Commerce and Industry;
• President – Economics Association of Zambia;
2
The TC was later restructured to be a sub-committee of the SC
13
• Head of Department – Department of Economics, University of Zambia;

• Representative – Civil Society;
• Representative – Zambia Institute of Chartered Accountants
The Steering Committee was chaired by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance. The Vice-
Chairperson was elected by the Steering Committee from among its members. The Executive Director
of ZIPAR was an ex-officio and served as secretary to the Committee.
The SC had sub-committees that manage its workload and ensured that it operated efficiently. The
ZIPAR SC established three (3) sub-committees, each with the responsibility of overseeing a specific
key area of the Institution and to report to the committee during its meetings.
The sub-committees were:
i. Audit and risk
ii. Finance and administration; and
iii. Technical
Each sub-committee has its own terms of reference that was reviewed annually.
Project Management Team: The project management team of ZIPAR was headed by the Executive
Director who was responsible for providing overall intellectual leadership to the Institute’s research
and capacity building activities and supervised broader operation of the institute. In the
accomplishment of these responsibilities, the Executive Director was assisted by the Research Fellows,
the Finance and Administration Manager and the Knowledge Manager.
3.3 Project Performance

Notwithstanding the start-up challenges, ZIPAR managed to implement most of the planned activities
and made significant contribution to the enhancement of economic policy capabilities in Zambia. The
institute is functional and fully operational; it has grown and expanded beyond the initial design of the
project. The restructuring and reforms initiated in 2009 (See Fig. 2) has resulted in accelerated
implementation of activities especially from 2011. ZIPAR has generated a number of useful research
studies and provided technical and advisory support to public, private, civil society and the media. For
example, since 2011, ZIPAR has produced over 30 research studies (both core and commissioned) and
organised at least 5 policy engagements with key actors. The institute trained 27 parliamentary staff
and 25 journalists in economic policy analysis and reporting in 2012. Through its strategic research
products and engagements, ZIPAR has emerged as a key player on the policy landscape in Zambia.
The institute organises periodic media briefing and thematic discussions through call-in sessions and
panel discussions with key policy actors. These engagements have helped to increase access, uptake
and utilisation of research based evidence for policy implementation and monitoring in the country.
Further, ZIPAR conducted reviews and disseminated information on policies and strategic
interventions to stakeholders through validation workshops, conferences and
ministerial/parliamentary briefings. These high level engagements have helped to bridge the research
policy gap and increased the knowledge and understanding of the stakeholders along the policy value
chain.
Currently most of the positions in ZIPAR have been filled and staff retention has improved. This
achievement has culminated in increased production of research outputs and enhanced policy
dialogue and dissemination as evidenced by the number of policy engagements and media visibility
that the institution has attained since 2011.
The above notwithstanding, some positions remain vacant in the approved organisational structure
proposed in the Medium Term Strategic Plan 2013-2017. This is partly due to ZIPAR facing a challenge
14
of inadequate office space. The current office building cannot accommodate the additional staff
required. To ensure that the problem is solved as soon as possible, management of the institute with
the help of the Ministry of Finance is exploring possibilities of alternative office space.
To a large extent ZIPAR has implemented all the recommendations of the Midterm Review (MTR) that
was conducted in August 2012. For example, the change of ZIPAR’s governance structure in 2013 after
a new board was reconstituted was a direct recommendation from the MTR. In response to the
recommendation to restructure the technical committee, the technical committee was re-constituted
as board sub-committees. The membership of sub-committees comprised external members who
were not members of the Steering Committee. The TORs of the Steering Committee and its
committees were integrated into ZIPAR board charter 3.
3
This became effective in 2013.
15
Figure 2 Project Implementation Milestones
Feb 2010-New
Feb 2010-Grant
Executive Director Nov 2012-Developed
extension to Aug
appointed 2013-2017 strategic
2014
plan
Aug 2014-Project
Nov 2008 First Mid.2009 Second Ends
Executive Director Executive Director
resigns recruited
Mid 2011
Second
2004 –Project designed
Executive
and approved.
2005-Project signed Director Resigns
2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Research
studies starts
Nov 2007-Grant
agreement Aug 2012-Mid-term Nov-2014 End of
May 2009-ZIPAR-
effective evaluation conducted project Evaluation
ACBF Consultative Mid 2010-Actual
meeting-Aide commencement of
memoire ZIPAR Activities
End 2009-complete all

professional staff
recruitment
16
Below is a systematic assessment of the relevance and fulfilment of the objectives of the ZIPAR project,
its efficiency and effectiveness in implementing planned activities and achieve intended result based
on information gathered from the document review and field data collection.
RELEVANCE
The institution despite teething challenges
has grown to become a trustworthy, capable Besides being a regular news reporter, I produce
and influential partner in the countries policy documentaries, I consult ZIPAR subject matter
process. ZIPAR has and continues to add experts and use their statistics, I developed a
value to the national policy value chain by particular programme solely based on a report
conducting and disseminating quality, ZIPAR had done- assessment of public transport in
Zambia.-Pennipher Sikainda-Reporter Zambia
relevant, timely and well packaged research
National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC)
information for decision making.
Evidence reveals that the project was and still is very relevant today. It is helping to bridge an existing
policy formulation, analysis, implementation and evaluation gap. The establishment of ZIPAR has
helped to improve the conduct and coordination of policy research and analysis in Zambia.
The institution has also re-enforced stakeholder participation and inclusiveness in national policy
processes in Zambia. As indicated by some of the stakeholders interviewed during the assessment,
‘ZIPAR is one of a kind’ in terms of responding to and delivering quality and timely policy research
products.
The public sector, private and civil society organisations

ZIPAR fills a very important gap in terms of in Zambia consider the establishment of ZIPAR as a
policy research and analysis. They make my job
novelty and a critical input into the national
a bit easier in contributing to me getting the
development process.
country picture. - IMF Country Resident
Representative ZIPAR is lauded and appreciated by civil society and the
media in Zambia for its activities such as the research
publication, awareness raising activities and policy debate, research data dissemination and its
pronouncements on policy issues especially given its quasi-government nature. The stakeholders also
perceive ZIPAR as a useful and credible institution because of the quality of its research approach and
objectivity of its information and research-based evidence and comments on government policies.
As indicated by some of the respondents, the setup of ZIPAR has created a culture of using evidence
for decision-making. Prior to the establishment of the Institute, research was mainly conducted by
academia geared towards education or by individual consultants driven by the monetary benefit.
However, ZIPAR has contributed to a gradual change of mind-set by showing that or research that
addresses topical issues can be done in an organised and systematic manner without focusing on the
short term or individual financial benefit.
The main justification and underlying assumption for the implementation of the ZIPAR project is still
relevant today given the world economic dynamics and the challenges in Zambia. As never before, the
country needs to enhance its capacity to make pragmatic policy choices, implement effectively and
achieve better outcomes that improves the livelihoods and wellbeing of its citizens.
17
Design and Implementation Gaps

It is worth noting that a number of design and implementation challenges such as the ones detailed
below affected timely implementation and achievement of project results:
• Inadequate consultation with stakeholders and delayed effectiveness of the projects-

during the design of the project some of the important stakeholders were not involved or
consulted. There was a long delay between grant approval and effectiveness. Evidence from
the assessment showed that with the exception of some key government agencies almost all
private sector and civil society actors who currently interact and collaborate with ZIPAR were
not engaged. This weakness affected the buy-in, commitment and trust of these stakeholders
at the initial stages of the project.
• Lack of coherent framework by GRZ. As a semi-autonomous policy research institute, the

government did not have a clear framework for integrating ZIPAR into the national policy
process. This framework would clarify what ZIPAR was going to be? What it was to do? How
it was going to do its work and where it was anchored? This is evidenced by the initial
expectation and location of the Institute within and as an appendage of the Ministry of
Finance and National Planning which created suspicion and mistrust of ZIPAR’s objectivity
and independence among other stakeholders.
• Inadequate budget for policy influencing/advocacy -There was inadequate project activities
and insufficient resources devoted to actions and events that would have enabled ZIPAR to
bring its policy research outputs to stakeholders to shape policy in terms of institutional
arrangements with media, legislators, the executive, etc. The Institute had to over rely on the
drive, leadership and network of the Executive Director to achieve the engagements and
relationships sought. This resulted in a certain level of disconnect in activities linking research
outputs into policy.
• Public sector orientation of the products and services of ZIPAR -The design of the ZIPAR
project activities emphasised the influence of policy through engagement with the branches
of government and the public sector and to a lesser extent civil society and academia without
explicitly courting of the private sector and SMEs.
• Weak human resource strategy- The sequencing of staffing of ZIPAR was not well
coordinated where ZIPAR from the onset dwelt on recruiting administrators prior to
researchers. In addition, the conditions of service as well as the proposed profile for
personnel (e.g. minimum of PHD for researchers) were not commensurate with the market.
• Absence of team-building events-There was no proper induction and or orientation of the

steering committee as to what ZIPAR is and what it should be doing at the onset of the
project. This prolonged the formative period of ZIPAR and resulted in project time overrun.
• Weak integration of sustainability/exit strategy-In the development of project document

there was minimal provision for sustainability activities, such as developing a partnership and
resource mobilisation strategy.
18
EFFICIENCY
As a new initiative, the budget allocation and utilisation of the ZIPAR project compares well with
international best practice. Over seventy-one (71%) of the grant was allocated and used for
programme activities. Despite initial delays and start-up challenges, ZIPAR managed to achieve most
of the key deliverables under research/studies and policy engagements. The institute managed to
develop and disseminate research products that contributed to the enhancement of the policy making
process in Zambia. Although the project suffered protracted delay during the first five years after
approval of the Grant in 2004 it managed to bounce back after the reforms and in 2011 and
accelerated its activities and policy engagements across the country. The project’s governance and
oversight mechanism enabled it to improve the quality and timeliness of products and services. This
effort was complimented by the tailor-made technical support (project implementation, financial
management and monitoring and evaluation) provided by ACBF.
Furthermore, ZIPAR demonstrated high awareness of its environment and the ability to adjust and
leverage opportunities including taking advantage of policy windows to enhance its relevance and
value along the policy value chain. The institute has also established networks and partnerships with
stakeholders such as academia, media, civil society and development partners that has enabled it to
access information and resources for its policy research and advocacy activities at a reasonable cost.
ZIPAR has built a reputation for delivering quality work with a good turnaround time and at a
reasonable cost. This is evidenced by the increased demand for commissioned research by its clients
ZIPAR has established a reputation for delivering quality research products and services with good
turnaround time and at reasonable cost. This is evidenced by the increased demand for commissioned
research by its clients. The high quality and quick turnaround of deliverables has become a critical
source of the institute’s competitive advantage and this value needs to be nurtured for sustainability.
ZIPAR’s knowledge management architecture is robust. It supports the development and

dissemination of high quality, responsive
and well packaged knowledge products in
a cost effective manner. For example, the ZIPAR was represented on the consultative group
respondent from UNDP indicated that responsible for revision of the statistics ACT. ZIPAR was
ZIPAR’s staff distinguished themselves in among the few to provide written feedback and inputs,
their inputs to policy activities and these were substantive and instrumental in adjusting
part of the bill.
products and has internal systems that do
work efficiently. ZIPAR has a quality
assurance system that ensures that its outputs are consistent with the agreed standards.
ACBF and ZIPAR need commendation for their responsiveness and flexibility. This is exemplified by the
response following May 2009 consultative meeting and the mid-term review i.e. project restructuring
and budget reallocation to adjust for initial challenges and delays.
19
Financial Assessment
Despite the initial delay and start-up challenges, the project expenditure stood at 90.88 percent of the
total grant amount. The project achieved 93.6% percent performance on the budget for program
activities, 83.6% on capital expenditure and 85% on operating cost. It is evident from the table that
despite the initial start-up delays and challenges, the project managed to stay focused and to align to
the changing dynamics.
Table 1: Programme Budget Performance
Cost Centre Initial Percentage of Total Total Total Total % of total

budget Budget expenditure expenditure expenditure expenditure expenditure
Allocation Allocation s as at as at 31 as at as at as at
ACBF Grant December December December 31December 31December
31, 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014
Program 1,070,234.00 71.4 398,759.27 612,365.78 845,729.32 1,001,687.49 93.6%
Activities
Capital 107,000.00 7.1 83,448.08 83,448.08 89,498.25 89,498.25 83.64%
Expenditure
Operating 272,800.00 18.2 101,918.75 144,541.13 187,849.67 231,995.00 85.04%
Cost
Contingency 50,000.00 3.3 18,124.32 24,778.46 32,090.29 40,099.40 80.2%
TOTAL 1,500,034.00 100% 602,250.42 865,133.45 1,155,167.53 1,363,280.14 90.88%
EFFECTIVENESS
The project has significantly achieved its broader objective of contributing to improving economic
governance in Zambia through enhancement of capacity for effective economic policy research
formulation, analysis and management. To a large extent, the immediate objectives of the project
including the establishment of a policy research institute have been achieved. ZIPAR is fully
operational as a semi-autonomous policy research institute with capable professional staff who are
generating research products as well as providing technical and advisory services that are contributing
to the national policy processes and outcomes. ZIPAR has matured and emerged as a legitimate and
reliable source of research-based evidence and a key driver of economic policy discourse in Zambia.
All the stakeholders interviewed corroborated that ZIPAR is a ‘value addition’ to the country’s policy
dynamics and the broader development process. The institute has generated a number of significant
studies that has been used by government ministries, parliament, local government councils and other
actors for their policy making work.
ZIPAR has been effective in straddling the divide of gaining the trust and enhancing its credibility
simultaneously with the public, private, civil society and the donor community. This is exemplified on
the government side by the consistent
request for ZIPAR staff to participate in
ZIPAR conducts an analysis and interpretations of our technical meetings of varied ministries,
statistics to provide policy guidance, this assist us to department and agencies.
fulfil our role- Central Statistical Office-Ministry of
Finance
The effectiveness of ZIPARs output in
contributing to the policy dialogue can be
evidenced by the increased request for ZIPAR’s commentaries on topical issues to be availed in soft
copy. Examples are IMF Resident Representative’s office, Ministry of Tourism and Arts, DFID and the
20
general public. ZIPAR was invited by the United Nations Development Programme to be a member of
the advisory committee of the Zambia Human Development Report for 2013.
Performance of Project Objectives

The immediate objectives of ZIPAR project were to: i) establish a semi-autonomous economic policy
and research institute, ii) provide training to government officials, iii) conduct research in areas of
economic policy formulation and management, iv) provide policy advice to government and promote
policy dialogue within Zambia through dissemination workshops, conferences and publications.
Consistent with its core mandate and objectives, ZIPAR’s operational programme is organized in terms
of three components: Research and Studies; Policy Dialogue; and Training.
As indicated in Table 1 and detailed in the section below, three (3) out of the four (4) specific objectives
have been achieved to a large extent despite the initial start-up challenges and implementation delays.
Given that the revised project document outsourced most of the training activities to the tertiary
institutions unsurprisingly ZIPAR’s capacity building training was limited.
Table 2. Qualitative Assessment of Performance of Project Objectives
Objectives Level of Comments/Reasons

Achievement *
Establishment of a semi- High To all stakeholders and observers there is no doubt as
autonomous economic ZIPAR has come to stay. Currently ZIPAR is a critical part
policy and research of the policy making architecture of Zambia. It has also
institute. developed a reputation for objectivity and non-
partisan research as well as a source of data.
Provision of training to Low There were fewer training activities than anticipated.
government officials. ZIPAR conducted a few for parliamentarian staff
journalist. The aide memoire of 2009 downgraded
ZIPAR’s role in training.
Conducting research in Very High To date over 50 research work has been published in
areas of economic policy the form of policy briefs, working papers, newsletters
formulation and and commentaries. These product and their
management. dissemination has been responsible for the enhanced
reputation and credibility of ZIPAR.
Provision of policy advise High ZIPAR has assumed a critical role in contributing inputs
to government and to policy documents from ministries, department,
promoting policy dialogue agencies and parliament. ZIPAR also serves as key
within Zambia through quality assurance for civil society and is currently the
dissemination workshops, lead institute appointed by government in the
conferences and publication development of an employment projection model for
the country
*(scale: very high to very low)
In terms of the specific deliverables, Table 4 below details the actual achievement levels of the key
deliverable after the restructuring in 2009.
21
Table 3: Performance of key Deliverables
Key Achievements Remarks

Deliverable
Establish a semi- ZIPAR established and fully The policy research institute was officially
autonomous functional registered under the Societies Act in Oct 2006
economic policy
Despite initial delays the institute was officially
and research
launched in 2009 and effectively started its
institute
policy research activities in 2011.
Provide training 52 people trained 27 parliamentary staff trained in economic

for government analysis
officials
25 Journalist trained in economic reporting
Conduct Over 50 research completed The research comprises of 40 core research

research in and 11 commissioned research. The key
economic policy collaborating institutions are the government
formulation and ministries (Finance, Trade, Tourism,
management agriculture Local government etc.), national
parliament, media, private sector, NGOs and
development partners.
Provide policy ZIPAR providing technical and The support includes conducting research,
advice to advisory support to government participating in task force and committees as
government institutions such as Ministries of well as providing tailor-made short term
Finance, Trade, Tourism and Arts, training and on-the-job technical support
Local Government and Zambia
Tourism Board.
Promote policy Organise Policy engagement The policy engagement activities includes
dialogue in activities including workshops, organising policy review and research agenda
within Zambia seminar, conferences, media setting workshops, media briefings and
engagements and parliamentary and debates, parliamentary briefings and hearings
ministerial briefing sessions as well as organising and participating in
national and international conferences
Other notable achievements include:
• ZIPAR was the focal point for the conduct of the annual Country Policy and Institutional
Assessment as part of the Africa Capacity Report process.
• In September 2014 ZIPAR led the hosting of the Poverty Reduction, Equity and Growth
Network (PEGNet), an annual international policy conference organized in collaboration with
other international policy actors.
• In 2013 ZIPAR led the first collaborative international policy conference with National
Economic Advisory Council (NEAC) and International Growth Centre IGC
• As a result of effectiveness of ZIPAR’s policy research products and technical/advisory
services, the Executive Director in 2013, was appointed as a member of the Monetary Policy
22
Advisory Committee of the Bank of Zambia. This has enhance the ability of ZIPAR to further
directly influence and contribute to the countries monetary policy;
• Since 2013, ZIPAR has increased its policy engagement activities. The institute provided a
number of critical; and insightful commentaries on topical issues by publishing articles in the
print media. 4
IMPACT
Evidence for the desk and field assessment clearly shows that ZIPAR has significantly contributed to
improving economic governance in Zambia. All the stakeholders interviewed concurred on the
immense value ZIPAR has brought on the policy arena of the country. They indicated that ZIPAR has
increased stakeholder access to timely, relevant and quality research based information that has
contributed to improved policy formulation, implementation and impact in Zambia.
According to stakeholder feedback, ZIPAR

has proven to be effective in their ZIPAR is the IGC’s local think tank partner; together we
engagements with stakeholders. Their brainstorm on the Zambian economy-Felix Mwenge
personnel and products have to a large Country Economist for International Growth Centre
extent been acknowledged as of high
quality and fit-for policy-making.
The participatory approach adopted by the institute has contributed to stakeholder buy-in and
increased utilisation of the evidence from their research studies. ZIPAR has been described by
stakeholders as having been purposeful (focused on topical issues relevant to the Zambian economy)
with its research topic and the dissemination and feedback mechanisms. To quote the Exec Director
“Civil Society organisations consistently invite ZIPAR staff to participate in their validation meetings.
They value our input in terms of quality assurance in their researches and strategies.”
The evaluation findings revealed that ZIPAR

We definitely need ZIPAR as an independent entity to has effected and influenced the policy
undertake fact checking. It’s one of the institutions we dialogue environment by bringing research-
can use-MWEPA ZDA based evidence to the table. It was
indicated that the institute through its
media briefing, policy debates and other
engagements with stakeholders has engendered a “cultural” shift towards the use of evidence in
4 [6 May 2013, The Post]: “Fitch Credit Ratings for Zambia”;

[13 May 2013, The Post]: “The Bank of Zambia (Amendment Act) and Statutory Instrument No. 32;
[27 May 2013, The Post]: “On the Removal of Fuel Subsidies”;
[10 June 2013, The Post]: “Harnessing Zambia’s External Debt for Development”;
[25 July 2013, The Post]: “Achieving Economic Transformation Through Special Economic Zones”;
[16 October 2013, The Post]: “2014 Budget Reflection”;
[30 October 2013, The Post]: “2014 Budget and Jobs”;
[1 November 2013, The Post]: “Assessing Government’s Wage, Recruitment Freeze”;
[6 November 2013, The Post]: “Credit Rating Downgrade: What it Means for Zambia”
[08 February 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Misconceptions surrounding high interest, low bank credit”;
[20 March 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Kwacha (depreciation) will affect international trade”
[03 April 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Zambia’s economy 25% bigger than previously estimated”
[07 April 2014, Times of Zambia]: “Zambia’s debt sustainable”
[07 April 2014, The Post]: “Rise in domestic debt worries ZIPAR”
[07 April 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Zambia needs public transport reforms”
[07 April 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Tighten policies to stabilise Kwacha”
[09 April 2014, Zambia Daily Mail]: “Zambia faces debt dilemma”
23
policy discourse. This is reflected in current media reportage and debate which has witnessed change
from rabble rousing political talk to well-reasoned argumentations backed up by evidence.
Some of the stakeholders interviewed

indicated that, there is no institution doing Imagine my surprise when Hon. Given Lubinda a
what ZIPAR is doing now, not even academia. Member of Parliament walked in to ZIPAR to request
The uniqueness of the institute and the value a copy of the Constituency Development Fund
of their products have attracted number of Report-Dr Pamela Kabaso Exec. Director ZIPAR
high profile persons including Ministers and
parliamentarians who at times walk-in for
information and material.
Although not much impact was made before 2011, the institute has been transformed and has made
significant improvement in the number of publications in form of policy briefs, research reports,
working papers and commentaries on economic policy. For instance out of the 21 studies planned to
be completed in 2013, ZIPAR concluded 18 across its thematic areas. In addition, a total of 11
commentaries on economic policy issues were published in the print and electronic media.
ZIPAR’s recognition has soared among its stakeholders. The impressive performance has culminated
into increased demand for commissioned research and policy support from Government agencies and
multilateral institutions. Also ZIPAR has been invited to sit on national task force and to participate in
high level policy meetings
The institute has spearheaded and contributed to a number of significant policy discussions and
review. Below are examples of some of the results of ZIPAR’s policy research activities:
Influence on policy in Zambia

• Study on Creative Industries in Zambia: ZIPAR’s work in tourism and arts has resulted in close
collaboration between ZIPAR and the Ministry of Tourism and Arts, responsible for policy
formulation in the tourism and arts sector as well as the Zambia Tourism Board, responsible
for marketing tourism. The Department of Arts and Culture is in the process of developing a
new policy on arts and culture. ZIPAR’s study on Creative Industries provided them a
dimension which they had not comprehensively considered before. They therefore requested
to use ZIPAR’s study on Creative Industries as an input into this policy.
• ZIPAR was invited to participate in the Zambia International Investment Forum hosted by the
Ministry of Commerce Trade and Industry. At the Forum, ZIPAR chaired and presented a paper
for the session on Creative Industries’ contribution to the economy, which was part of the
study being carried out. ZIPAR also presented a paper on Creative Industries at a British
Council Conference themed “The Future We Want”.
• Trip modelling and cost analysis for public road transport system for the city of Lusaka”. The
Ministry of Local Government and Housing has indicated that the study on “Trip modelling
and cost analysis for public road transport system for the city of Lusaka” will be used as an
input in the design of the Bus Rapid Transit system for Lusaka and the National Transport
Policy.
• Mathematical optimization study: The Road Development Agency (RDA) has indicated that
the model developed under mathematical optimization study for the core road network
planning to link Zambia will be adopted for their use. They have further provided up to date
2013 traffic count data in the finalisation of the study.
24
• Following the study “Trip modelling and cost analysis for public road transport system for
the city of Lusaka”, ZIPAR has been invited by the Contractor Magazine to contribute articles
to the publication;
• Besides the uptake of these transport and infrastructure studies, the Associate Researcher
– Transport and Infrastructure has been invited by the Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply
and Communication to sit on the Committee that is looking at the modalities of setting up a
national airline.
• Study to determine the factors that drive tourism in Zambia: This Zambia Tourism Board
requested ZIPAR to conduct this study to enable the institution to determine the factors that
drive tourism in Zambia. This is a follow-up to ZIPAR’s earlier work “Costing and Pricing of
Tourism in the Zambia: the case of Livingstone”
• As a result of the high impact of ZIPAR’s policy research products and technical/advisory
services, the Executive Director in 2013, was appointed as a member of the Monetary Policy
Advisory Committee of the Bank of Zambia. This has enhance the ability of ZIPAR to further
directly influence and contribute to the countries monetary policy.
• ZIPAR published a commentary on the Amended Bank of Zambia Act and Statutory Instrument
(SI) 33 on the regulation of the Balance of Payments monitoring. Consequently, Government
re-issued SI 33 as SI 55 which took into account some of the comments and submissions made
by ZIPAR and other stakeholders.
• The Financial Sector Development Programme (FSDP) of the Bank of Zambia continues to
collaborate with ZIPAR on issues they would want to be considered in the institute’s research.
For example in 2014, FSDP wrote to ZIPAR on the areas they would require further research
by the institute.
Interface and Engagement with high level government and Parliament officials
• The Secretary to the Cabinet on 29th October 2013, invited ZIPAR to make a presentation
before him and Permanent Secretaries at Cabinet Office on modalities to institutionalize ZIPAR
input into national policy process.
• The Economic Advisor at State House invited ZIPAR to nominate a researcher from Trade and
Investment unit to represent him on a high level delegation to Portugal by the Ministry of
Communication and the Zambia Information Communication Authority (ZICTA).
• The Policy Analysis Committee at Cabinet Office requested ZIPAR to share with them all its
policy briefs;
• The Office of the Special Assistant to the President on Economic and Development Affairs
at State House requested for more collaboration in research and policy analysis with ZIPAR.
• On 22nd October 2013, ZIPAR was invited by the Parliamentary Expanded Committee of
Supply on the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure presents a paper on the topic “The 2014
National Budget and its ramifications of the economy”.
25
• On 31st January 2014, ZIPAR was invited by the Parliamentary Committee on Estimates
present a paper on the topic “Fiscal Decentralisation and the Performance-Based
Management for Effective Budget Implementation in Zambia”.
Engagement with Non-state Actors

• Hosting of International Conference: ZIPAR was selected to co-host the 2014 Poverty
Reduction, Equity and Growth Network (PEGNet) conference that was held in Lusaka, Zambia.
The PEGNet brought together researchers and practitioners with an interest in issues around
the poverty-inequality-growth nexus in developing countries, and the link with the German
and international development policy bodies.
• On 3rd May 2013, ZIPAR contributed to the public hearings on the proposed hike in electricity
prices by ZESCO for 2013-2016.
• Enhanced engagement with the media: ZIPAR continued to engage with stakeholder via a
number of different media outlets. It contributed to debates on topical policy issues and
development needs and priorities of the country. These media outlets include ZNBC, MUVI
TV, UNZA Radio, QFM, Hot FM, Times of Zambia Newspaper and The Post Newspapers.
• Since 2013, ZIPAR has increased its policy engagement activities. The institute provided a
number of critical; and insightful commentaries on topical issues by publishing articles in the
print media
Capacity Building and Training

ZIPAR was expected to provide Master’s level degree training for civil servants in designated areas as
well as non-degree (In-service training for civil servants in designated areas). However, this objective
was modified to only include capacity building workshops and seminars following the establishment
of the Economic Policy Management programme at the University of Zambia.
Some of the training programmes that have been undertaken include:
Training of 27 Clerking Staff for the National Assembly on economic policy analysis in 2011;
Training of 25 Journalists on Economic reporting in 2012;
The training conducted for the Clerking Staff at the National Assembly has resulted in closer
collaboration between the two institutions as ZIPAR is now always invited by the Clerk of the
National Assembly to prepare memorandum and other submissions on on-going studies of
the Parliamentary Committees of the National Assembly.
The training of journalists in Economic Reporting has opened up an avenue for the media to
utilize some of ZIPAR outputs posted on the website in their media articles thereby
contributing to policy dialogue and economic literacy.
The training provided to tourism sector players will lead to the setting up of an experimental
Tourism Satellite Account by 2015 in line with the SADC member countries’ deadline to set up
the TSA.
26
SUSTAINABILITY
Organisational sustainability is predicated on having managerial, marketing, human resource, financial

and technical sustainability. Detailed in the table below is a review/assessment of ZIPAR’s risk,
identified during the mid-term evaluation.
Table 4: Assessment of Pre-Mid-term Evaluation Risk
Risk Identified In Mid-Term CURRENT ASSESSMENT

Review
There is potential risk that the Though the retention of key staff is still a risk factor its impact on
Institute may not be able to the sustainability of ZIPAR is much less. This is due to the current
continue to attract and retain “pull” factor ZIPAR has gained. ZIPAR has achieved a respectable
highly qualified research staff. brand equity that is attractive to be associated with. This factor
enables ZIPAR to attract quality prospective staff.
However despite these factors ZIPAR will benefit from a more
commercial/market orientation to enable it raise the needed funds
to pay commensurate salaries for quality staff to augment their
numbers/capacities
There is potential risk of failure by This risk is still present but ZIPAR’s strategic plan (2013-2017) has
the Institute to meet the high been designed to respond appropriately therefore if the institute
demands and expectations being remains true to the objectives, strategies and implementation
placed on it to fulfil its Think-Tank modalities of the strategy it will be able to mitigate the risk.
role.
Inability of GRZ to provide a Though GRZ has not specifically responded to this risk, ZIPAR has
coherent framework for the evolved and is in a much better position now. It has been able to
Institute to work with public or establish its identity and credibility through its research output and
quasi-public sector institutions with policy engagement. The onus is now on ZIPAR to negotiate an
similar or overlapping mandates. appropriate framework.
Exit of the project funding agencies ZIPAR has strengthened its usefulness to government and secured
implying lack of sustained funding partnerships with institutions which amongst others include the
for the project. World Bank, and Bank of Zambia. The increased demand from
government, private sector and the development community is
good for ZIPAR sustainability after the end of the project.
Of the four risks mentioned in the MTR the most critical challenge to ZIPAR’s sustainability is the first
two i.e. “the inability by the Institute to timely recruit and retain professional staff” (i.e. ED and
Research Fellows) ZIPAR needs to address its human resource sustainability critically because with no
certainty, no spelt out direction in terms of a career path this negates prospects of attracting
committed staff. Currently if a staff leaves for higher learning there is no position to return to.
On the “inability of GRZ to provide a coherent framework for ZIPAR” to work with public or quasi-
public sector institutions with similar or overlapping mandates. To its credit ZIPAR has managed to
create a niche for itself. Going forward it must seek to consolidate that niche position.
Of the other two risks mentioned in the MTR namely “the Inability of ZIPAR to meet the demands of
its various stakeholders” and the “Exit of the project funding agencies” implying lack of sustained
funding for the project. These are lesser threats and can be mitigated. ZIPAR has already through
collaborations with donors (e.g. ZEAP/DFID, WorldBank) and with other agencies e.g. Bank of Zambia
and its current relationships with the Zambian Centre for Accounting Studies. ZIPAR has started the
27
process of expanding beyond a “project” and assume the status of a growing institute despite the
current end of project funding.
There are still other risks such as political risk e.g. change in government, a change in tolerance for
objective and constructive policy assessment, contribution and critique. ZIPAR is susceptible to heavy
government intervention. ZIPAR has however gained respect and good relations with other political
actors such as the National Assembly, the judiciary and the media which portends well for insulating
it from political pressures.
ZIPAR has also developed and is implementing an internship programme taking on students,
volunteers and visiting
researchers. This has proved
I think ZIPAR has done fairly well. They are fairly independent, attractive both internally and
they are frank and tackle issues that are big. Going forward
externally for Zambia’s studying
ZIPAR needs some arm’s length funding to maintain their
abroad and foreigners (currently a
independence and maintain the quality of work. - IMF Resident
Finnish intern has been at work).
Representative
The interns both foreign and local
expand ZIPAR’s partnerships and
serve ambassadors and as entry points with new organisations, institutions and countries
In the presence of other competing think tanks e.g. National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC),
International Governance Centre (IGC), Policy Monitoring and Research Centre (PMRC) aiming to fill
the gap in Zambian policy development, ZIPAR has been strategic in filling the space as a coordinator
of these think tanks. This also provides them with a collaborative advantage in influencing national
policy. These relationships have been formalised with signing of MOUs amongst them to work
together. ZIPAR is by these actions becoming more relevant to policy issues and becoming
indispensable to Zambian economic policy discourse.
With regards to financial sustainability ZIPAR is largely dependent on donor and government
support for its operations and programmes. In order to guarantee our long-term organisational
sustainability, ZIPAR needs to develop mechanisms to enable it to access financial resources from
diverse sources, such as leveraging the power of its brand name to undertake independent economic
advocacy, policy research and policy analysis that could be funded by various public, private or
developmental sector clients. Consistency of their publications is key to their sustainability.
ZIPAR is in the initial phase as an organisation i.e. start-up and such is still in need of external support.
However the support must have clear objectives of helping reduce dependency on government and
donors. The support must;
• lead to a sustainable organisation that is focused on
the longer term objective of being a representative
of the Zambia public in terms of economic policy
• Support accountability whereby ZIPAR fully
discloses the full nature and costs of their operations
and their governance arrangements;
• Improve efficiency, effectiveness and economy by
introduction/support of/ implementation of value
for money principles
Figure 3: Organisational life Cycle
28
LESSONS
From inception there should be a well-defined and clearly laid out institutional framework. A clear
institutional framework must be well-envisioned and positioned for the institution to be able to chart
its course systematically. Resources – financial and other material must be well planned for and
provided as and when needed or planned for. The early part of the project suffered from this situation
where providers of resources were not fulfilling their part.
Curtailed policy impact due to inadequate funding for advocacy and stakeholder engagement.
Although ZIPAR has helped to stimulate policy debate based on evidence and to enhance utilisation
of research based information for policy making in Zambia, it was realised that more could have been
achieved should there have been a clearly defined strategy and adequate resources for publicising the
activities of the institute through to the grass root levels and to engage the different actors along the
policy value chain. An example of this situation was on research conducted by ZIPAR targeted at
transport owners, drivers etc. The outcome of the research was disseminated to government
ministries, departments and agencies as well as donors but not disseminated to transport owners,
associations, drivers, spare parts dealers etc. partly because there were no earmarked funds to
customise the outputs and conduct grassroots’ advocacy.
On hindsight the project could have benefited from some internal soft skills training activities built
into the project for ZIPAR personnel. The project did not accommodate soft skills such as team-
building, lobbying and advocacy, coaching and mentoring, proposal writing and resource mobilisation
that have been identified as critical for the institutes to achieve its strategic objective and to stay
relevant over time.
Delayed recruitment impacted negatively on the timeliness and quality of delivery of the project
outputs at the early stages. Recruitment and development of conditions of service commensurable
with the market rates in Zambia should have been given the needed attention at the early stages to
ensure that most capable staff were recruited and retained
Lack of clearly defined sustainability strategy and exit plan has a negative effect on ZIPARs
independence and ability to focus on the future without spreading too thin. An effective sustainability
strategy and exit plan will enable the institute to balance its effort in terms of its investment in core
and commission research and other policy engagements. It was evident that a clear forecasting of
resource availability for the future will further enhance ZIPAR’s ability to provide a more targeted
support to the policy process and impacts in Zambia.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

ZIPAR has gained respect and recognition as a preferred policy research institute in Zambia. The
institute is now overwhelmed with requests from many organisations. The institute has demonstrated
its capabilities to provide quality, relevant and timely policy research information to enable its
stakeholders to make informed decisions and to make strategic policy choices. ZIPAR has contributed
to effective stakeholder engagement and inclusion of non-state actors in the national policy processes.
Through its media engagements and parliamentary briefings, the institute has created spaces for
evidence based policy debates and assessments in the country. Stakeholders consider ZIPAR among
the best and most relevant value addition institutions to the policy making value chain of the country.
The public, private and civil society actors including the media described ZIPAR as a reliable and
preferred source for evidence-based policy research information. Most of the stakeholders
interviewed anticipated a more intensive participation and contribution of ZIPAR to policy discourse
29
and debates in Zambia and to continue to chart the course of making research-based evidence the
fulcrum of policy decisions and engagement in the country.
The above notwithstanding, ZIPAR must evolve ways of responding to and successfully managing the
increasing expectation from stakeholders without losing focus and spreading itself too thin. In the
short-term ZIPAR should be more proactive and assume a central role as a driver of its strategic
agenda. The institute must evolve a flexible but robust strategy that will enable it to balance short
term needs with the long term vision.
ZIPAR must deepen its policy engagements with stakeholders by disseminating its research
information to the grassroots level. ZIPAR also needs to be responsive to the needs of the private
sector and adjust its strategies accordingly. The institute must actively work to secure a more
diversified funding base by thinking outside the donor and government milieu to ensure sustainable
funding for its activities.
In conclusion it can be argued that ZIPAR has emerged as key player in the policy value chain in Zambia.
The institute has bridged the gap in policy making in the country by increasing stakeholder access to
quality, relevant and timely research-based evidence, enhanced utilisation of policy research
information by promoting inclusive and evidence based policy engagements and discourse among
stakeholders as well as improved the receptive capacity of key actors through the conduct of tailor
made and hands on training in policy research formulation and analysis. Though a quasi-government
institution, ZIPAR has made tremendous contribution to the policy making process and is charting a
course that is critical for improving the delivery and impact of economic policies in Zambia. This
notwithstanding, one cannot discount the technical and supportive role of ACBF, DANIDA, Norway,
DFID and the Government of Zambia in facilitating the establishment and operationalization of the
project. Through effective leadership, enhanced collaboration and engagement, ZIPAR is promoting a
culture of ‘letting the research evidence speak for itself’ in its policy advocacy and engagement with
the larger population through media blitz and parliamentary appearances.
It is therefore convenient to conclude that despite the teething challenges and implementation delays,
ZIPAR rose up to the challenge and is charting a new course for stimulating utilisation of evidence for
policy making, implementation monitoring and evaluation in Zambia. The challenge ahead for ZIPAR
is in consolidating the gains and sustaining the momentum.
The following steps, derived from the findings of the evaluation are recommended;
1. ZIPAR should increase its engagement with the private sector. ZIPAR has succeeded and
done well in enhancing the policy research formulation and analysis capabilities in
government, civil society and academia. However, much more needs to be done to
mainstream the private sector into the policy process in Zambia in terms of building their skills
and competencies to effectively engage and provide policy options. It is recommended that
ZIPAR engages more strongly with the private sector issues.
2. It is recommended that going forward there is need for ZIPAR to increase the provision of
hands-on short-term training for the key stakeholders to enhance their capability to access
and use the research products. This support among others will improve its visibility and
vertical engagement with stakeholders across the policy making value chain.
3. ZIPAR should develop and implement strategies that will enhance its independence and
effective governance. To lessen the risk of external influence over the governance and
management of ZIPAR, sustainable institutional arrangements and processes must be
30
adopted to further insulate ZIPAR in terms of appointing authority and sustenance of

government subvention.
4. It is recommended that ZIPAR improves its outreach and visibility especially to the rural areas
and to expand its policy research to stakeholders beyond Zambia. ZIPAR initially focused
predominantly on satisfying public sector/ national research however having now established
its credentials, it is recommended that ZIPAR position itself to bid for and conduct research
with regional focus especially for bilateral and multilaterals stakeholders. This effort can also
contribute to the relevance and financial sustainability of the institute.
5. It is recommended that ZIPAR endeavor to attract and retain highly qualified staff by
developing and implementing a scheme of services which defines a career path within ZIPAR
and caters for the regular upgrading of skills and capacity of staff. This is to stimulate long
term commitment of staff and to reduce staff turnover.
6. There is need to expand or re-locate to a more spacious office that can accommodate all the
required staff. The current office space is optimized, no additional personnel can be taken on
board. ZIPAR is urged to chart a growth strategy which caters for increased personnel.
7. It is recommended that ZIPAR improves its resource mobilization effort by developing and
implementing a clear strategy including partnerships, promoting subscription for its research
products and consultancy services in research and tailor-made short term training. The reason
being that, notwithstanding the goodwill and collaboration with other institutions the
financing landscape in Zambia still remains a challenge. ZIPAR should therefore expand its
partnership and networking to include non-traditional donors and local actors to improve
its relevance and sustainability
31
ANNEX
CASE STUDY- ZIPAR communications success story -Constituency Development Fund
ZIPAR researchers had established a relationship with the media to draft comment pieces for
national newspapers5. The first article was published on 30th June it was on second hand car
imports and the implications for road safety and consumer rights in Zambia. However it was
the second story published in the Daily Mail on July 21st. that generated a groundswell of
public debate.
ZIPAR made a case for using a needs-based funding formula to distribute the Constituency
Development Fund more fairly. ZIPAR suggested that the introduction of a needs-based
funding formula. This was to represent the first step of a more comprehensive reform aimed
at improving the governance and transparency of the CDF and tackle mismanagement of the
fund. The argument focused exclusively on introducing an element of needs-based funding.
ZIPAR was of the opinion that incremental reform of this kind was politically more realistic.
The decision on the timing for the publication of the article was made in reaction to an
announcement by the Minister for Local Government who said “the government planned to
tighten the guidelines on the CDF to reduce abuse”. This announcement sparked a debate on
the CDF which ZIPAR decided to use opportunistically to press the case for wider reform. To
build momentum and interest in the ZIPAR story and disseminate it across a range of news
outlets ZIPAR’s Communications Officer, Euphrasia Mapulanga issued a general press
release on the following Monday afternoon, post publication. This led to (i) ZIPAR Executive
Director being interviewed on Hot FM on Wednesday morning and (ii) a follow-up news story
in the Post on Thursday.
Additionally ZIPAR also promoted the article on Facebook and twitter as well as on their own
website. This led to twitter interaction with the Zambian Economist, an influential economics
blogger, who republished the Daily Mail article on his Facebook page on the Tuesday (and on
his main blog on the Thursday). This provoked lots of comment and debate on the ZIPAR
proposals,
On the Thursday The Times ran a front page story which quoted Finance Minister Chikwanda
calling for reform of the CDF. Echoing the ZIPAR critique he said: “Allocating CDF equally to all
constituencies is not fair, as rural constituencies face serious challenges compared to urban-
based constituencies. We hope the relevant parliamentary committee will guide us on this
issue and how we can go about to ensure there is fair distribution of resources." On the back
of this announcement by the Finance Minister ZIPAR published a follow-up press release -
partly to claim credit for their impact - and to cement the case for a needs-based model (and
also to draw attention to the case for wider reform including tackling abuse by devolving the
fund over time). On Friday the Lusaka Voice published a news story based on the press
release, and the Zambian Economist, agreed to post on his Facebook page and blog, a further
article from ZIPAR.
Through effective planning and opportunistic reaction to news events, using both traditional
and social media outlets, ZIPAR managed to generate 5 days (‘cut through’) coverage for their
research, culminating in a policy announcement by Finance Minister Chikwanda that directly
echoed ZIPAR’s core arguments. The Minister said that the current arrangements for
allocating the CDF need to be reformed to ‘ensure a fair distribution of resources’, which was
precisely the position advanced by ZIPAR. The article and subsequent dissemination work on
5
. The Daily Mail had agreed to run regular guest columns from ZIPAR staff.
32
the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) exemplifies good practice for think tanks seeking
to enhance the impact of their research on policy debates.
In many ways this experience reflected effective think tank practice. The key points are:
• ZIPAR reacted to and capitalised on an external event, in this case a debate on the CDF
and a government announcement. Thinks tanks are more influential when they
publish at opportune moments. As in this case think tanks should be looking for
opportunities to “reheat” existing research.
• The media activities integrated traditional media (newspapers and radio) with the use
of social media (both Twitter and Facebook). In particular social media was used to
continue to build momentum for the story.
• Being prepared to engage in debate: after some (mild) criticism from the Zambian
economist, ZIPAR did not stay silent. Instead they responded quickly and firmly, and
authoritatively.
• Effective communications takes effort and time: the volume of work was considerable
(3 articles, 2 press releases, and various social media interaction were produced in a
week when ZIPAR was busy with other things), but the reward from putting time in
when an opportunity arises, as this example demonstrates, can be significant.
• The importance of a utilizing your website in information dissemination: on a number
of occasions in the week the website was used to promote the ZIPAR articles and
activities (e.g. placing the press release on the website).
• One-off media coverage is insufficient there is need for follow-up activities e.g. ZIPAR
by engaging the Finance Minister directly, and also the parliamentary committee he
has asked to look at options for reforming the CDF.
The overall lesson is that coverage like this is positive for think tanks. It increases their visibility
and relevance. For example, said (in an email to ZIPAR):
33
Stakeholders/Policy Makers interviewed 3 – 14 November, 2014
REF NAME OF INSTITUTION FOCAL POINT PERSON CONTACT DETAILS

1 National Assembly Mrs. Doris K.K. Mwiinga +260 211 292425-36
Clerk of the National Assembly +260 979 168102
Attn: Mr. Simon Mtambo smtambo@parliament.gov.zm
mtambosisi@yahoo.com
2 Cabinet Office Dr. Felix Phiri +260 211 253135
Permanent Secretary-Policy and +260 977764212
Coordination-Cabinet Office felix.phiri@cabinet.gov.zm
3 State House Mr. Paul Siame +260 211 260803
Special Assistant to the President on
Economic and Development Affairs
4 Ministry of Tourism and Mr. Steven Mwansa-PS Attn. Mrs. +260 211 238772 / 226660
Arts Chiseche Mutale cmmutale@yahoo.co.uk
Director – Planning and Information
5 Ministry of Commerce Mr. Siazongo D. Siakalenge +260 211 228301
Trade and Industry Permanent Secretary +260 966 752720
Siazongosiakalenge@mcti.gov.zm
6 Ministry of Mr. Charles Sipanje-PS Attn. Mr. +260 211 252475 / 252158
Communication, John Chipuwa +260 966 422743
Transport, Works and Coordinator, Monitoring and Johnchipuwa1@gmail.com
Supply Evaluation
7 Ministry of Mr. Charles Sipanje-PS Attn. Mr. +260 974 531632/963 370336
Communication, Danny Kafuli kafulidanny@gmail.com
Transport, Works and Asst. Director Transport
Supply
8 Ministry of Finance (MoF) Mr. Felix Nkulukusa +260 211 253786
Permanent Secretary-EMF +260 977 368762
felix.nkulukusa@mofnp.gov.zm
9 Ministry of Local Mr. Samson Msichili-PS +260 211 251128
Government and Housing Attn. Mr. Misheck Lungu-Director
DHID
10 Lusaka City Council Mr. Alex Mwansa Town Clerk +260 977 103758
Attn: Mr. Ronald Ngala-Manager ngalaronald11@gmail.com
Inner Ring Road Project
11 Zambia Revenue Mr. Ezekiah Phiri +260 211 229214/228414/23
Authority (ZRA) Director Research and Planning +260 977 151994
12 Zambia Development Mr. Patrick Chisanga-Executive +260 211 220177/223859
Agency (ZDA) Director Attn. Mr. Ernest Mwape- Ernest.Mwape@zda.org.zm
Director Planning and Policy
13 National Economic Mr. Webby Wake +260 211 221928
Advisory Council (NEAC) Executive Secretary +260 955 774425
neac@zamtel.zm
14 National Roads Fund Dr. Anthony Mwanaumo +260211 252731/253145/255660
Agency (NRFA) Executive Director and Chief nrfa@zamnet.zm
Executive Officer
34
15 Bank of Zambia (BOZ) Dr. Michael Gondwe-Governor Attn. +260 211 2288/228901/5/
Mr. Peter Banda 237068
Senior Director, Economics pbanda@boz.zm
16 National Arts Council Ms. Mulenga Kapwepwe- +260 977 807707
Chairperson
17 Technical Education, Mr. David C. Chakonta +260211 253331/251040/253334
Vocational and Executive Director /253211
Entrepreneurship teveta@teveta.org.zm
Training Authority
(TEVETA)
18 Department of Head of Office Ms. Emma Donnelly +260 211 423352
International
Development (DFID) – Attn: Annelies
Zambia office
19 World Bank Zambia Ms. Kundhavi Kadiresan-Country +260 211 373227
Country Office Director Attn. Mr. Praveen Kumar-+260 977 790189
Lead Economist pkumar1@worldbank.org
20 International Monetary Mr. Tobias Nybo Rasmussen +260 211 260014 / 262986
Fund (IMF) Resident Representative +260 977 797012
TRasmussen@imf.org
21 United Nations Ms. Janet Rogan-UNDP Resident +260 211 250800/254586
Development Representative Attn. Mr. George Registry.zm@undp.org
Programme Lwand-Chief Economist
22 International Growth Mr. Felix Mwenge +260 211 252559
Centre (IGC) In-Country Economist felix.mwenge@theigc.org
23 Central Statistical Office Mr. John Kalumbi +260 211 251377/253468
(CSO) Director jkalumbi@zamstats.gov.zm
24 University of Zambia Dr. Felix Masiye-HOD, Economics +260 211 290475

(UNZA) Department +260 976 393366
fmasiye@yahoo.com
25 University of Zambia Prof. Seshamani Venkatesh +260 211 290475

(UNZA) selash4@gmail.com
26 Jesuit Centre forFr. Leonard Chiti-Director +260 211 290410
Theological Reflection ichiti@jesuits.org.zm/jctr@jesuit
(JCTR) s.org.zm
27 Zambia Chamber of Mr. Geoffrey Sakulanda-President +260 211 252483/253007
Commerce and Industry +260 978 771414
(ZACCI) geoffsakulanda@gmail.com
28 Economics Association ofMr. Isaac Ngoma-President +260 211 225305
Zambia (EAZ) +260 966 756333
isaac@linknet.co.zm
29 Zambia Economic Dr. Simon Foot-Programme +260 962 205693
Advocacy Programme Manager guy.lodge@nuffield.ox.ac.uk
(ZEAP)
35
30 Centre for Trade Policy Ms. Isabel Mukelabai-Executive +260 211 264409
and Development Director imukelabai@yahoo.com
31 Coordinating Council for Ms. Engwase Mwale-Executive +260 211 227517/224727
Non-Governmental Director +260 966 640760
Organisations (NGOCC) ebmwale@hotmail.com
32 Zambia Chamber of Small Ms. Patience Sakuringwa-Executive +260 211 253372/254855
and Medium Business Director
Associations (ZCSMBA)
33 COMESA Mr. Sindiso Ngwenya-Secretary +260 211 229732
General +260 977 137289
Attn: Mr. Tasara Muzorori-Senior tmuzorori@comesa.int
Trade Officer
34 Dr. Mwilola Imakando Former ZIPAR Executive Director Roma Township
35 Zambia Daily Mail Mr. Bryson Mumba-Managing +260 977 809424
Director Attn. Mr. Martin Kapende- editor@daily-mail.co.zm
Editorials Editor mkapende@hotmail.co.zm
36 Post Newspapers Mr. Bivan Saluseki-Managing Editor +260 955 767060
Attn. Mr. Austin Mwange- mutepukamwange@gmail.com
Researcher
37 Zambia National Mr. Kennedy Bwalya-Assignment +260 211 251983
Broadcasting Editor Attn. Ms. Pennipher Sikainda +260 977 307484
Corporation (ZNBC) pennipher@yahoo.com
38 Zambia National Mr. Kennedy Bwalya-Assignment +260 211 251983
Broadcasting Editor Attn. Mr. Arnold Tutu-
Corporation (ZNBC) Reporter (former radio Phoenix at
MTR)
39 Hot FM Radio Mr. Changwe Kabwe-Station
+260 211 258947-51
Manager +260 967 935338
changwekabwe@yahoo.com
40 Dr. Pamela Nakamba- Executive Director-ZIPAR +260 211 252559
Kabaso +260 966/955 880079
pkabaso@zipar.org.zm
41 Ceasar Cheelo former Research Fellow Trade 0977 852221
and Investment:
42 Nakaluba Gondwe: former Accountant 0977 975214
43 Bernard Banda: former Associate Researcher 0978 241329
Trade and Investment
36
FIGURE 3: ZIPAR organisational structure (As per 2013-2017 Strategic plan)
Steering Committee
(Board)
Technical Committee
Executive Director
Senior Research Fellow

– Macroeconomics
Research Fellow – Research Fellow – Emerging Finance & Admin

Research Fellow – Research Fellow –
Human Development Transport & Infrastructure Themes Manager
Public Finance Trade & Investment
Associate Researcher Associate Researcher Associate Researcher – Associate Researcher – Emerging Knowledge
– Public Finance – Trade & Investment Human Development Transport & Infrastructure Themes Manager
Research Assistant Research Assistant Programme Research Assistant Research Assistant Emerging Information Accountant
Officer Themes Technology
S i li t
Personal
Assistant
Documentalist Accounts HR Support

Assistant Officer Staff
37
ZIPAR Research Documents and Commentaries
Serial Release
Title Type Number Date
WORKING PAPERS
COMESA Customs Union and Free Trade Area Working Paper 6 2012
Resource mobilisation & fundraising in Basic schools Working Paper 7 2012
Creating & wasting fiscal space: Zambia fiscal performance 2002-2011 Working Paper 8 2012
The costs & pricing of tourism in Zambia Working Paper 9 2012
Understanding youth labour demand constraints in Zambia Working Paper 10 2012
Estimating returns to education in Zambia Working Paper 11 2013
The Birth, Death and Survival of exports in Zambia Working Paper 12 2013
Resource allocation mode for the CDF Working Paper 13 2013
Income Distribution and the Middle Class Working Paper 14 2013
The role of Creative Economy Working Paper 15 2013
Trip Modelling and Cost analysis for public transport Working Paper 16 2013
Welfare Comparison in Zambia Working Paper 17 2014
Uncovering the Unknown: An Analysis of Tax Evasion in Zambia Working Paper 18 2014
Mathematical Road Distance Optimisation for the Core Road Network Planning to
19
Link Zambia Working Paper 2014
Switching Costs Relationship Banking and MSMEs Formal Bank Credit in Zambia Working Paper 20 2014
DISCUSSION PAPER
Contributing Family Workers and Poverty Discussion Paper 1 2013
MANUAL
A Guide to Mining Taxation Manual 1 2013
POLICY BRIEFS
What do regional trade reforms mean for Zambia Policy Brief 3 2012
38
Serial Release
Title Type Number Date
Creating and wasting fiscal space Policy Brief 4 2012
Constraints on the demand for youth labour in Zambia Policy Brief 5 2013
Policy implications of the returns to education in Zambia Policy Brief 6 2013
Mining Taxation in Zambia Policy Brief 7 2013
Economic profiling of the creative industries Policy Brief 8 2013
Accelerating Export Growth in Zambia Policy Brief 9 2013
Making Public Transport in Lusaka City more Efficient and Effective Policy Brief 10 2013
An Equitable Allocation of the Constituency Development Fund Policy Brief 11 2013
Who are the middle class in Zambia? Policy Brief 12 2013
Bridging the PAYE Tax Gap Policy Brief 13 2014
Making Every Mile Count: Prioritising Infrastructure Policy Brief 14 2014
Policy Brief 15 2014
ZIPAR Commentaries
 The Bank of Zambia (Amendment) Act and Statutory Instrument No.32 of 2013
 Reflection on the 2012 National Budget Speech
 The Fitch Credit Rating for Zambia
 Rethinking the Retirement Age in Zambia
 Zambia’s Need for Significant Policy Reforms to Accelerate Human Development
 ZIPAR On the Removal of Fuel Subsidies
 Harnessing Zambia’s External Debt for Development
 What the Auditor General’s Office has been saying about Public Financial management in Zambia
 Urbanization Dilemma: How Rapid Population Expansion could clog up Zambia’s Main Cities
 Misconceptions Surround High Interest Rates and Low Bank Credit to MSMEs in Zambia
 Zambia’s Economy 25 percent bigger than previously Estimated
 Lusaka needs Public Transport Reforms
 Making Every Mile Count
39
 Used Motor Vehicle Imports: The Quest to Squash Lemons

 Does Zambia need to change the way it allocates the CDF?
 Eurobonds-Weighing the risks
 High Trade Costs-What can be done?
 Should people worry about incomes gaps?
Newsletter
 ZIPAR Quarterly Issue 1
 ZIPAR Quarterly Issue 2
40
ZIPAR INTERVIEW PICTURES
41
42
43

Zipar End of Project Evaluation Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zipar End of Project Evaluation Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

End-of Project Evaluation-Zambia Institute of Policy and Research

End of Project Evaluation of the Zambia

Submitted by Daniel Andoh

Content of Tables and Figures

Figure 1: ZIPAR Project Evaluation Process .......................................................................................... 11

• Influence on monetary policy in Zambia

Purpose of End of Project Evaluation

1. Clarify processes and 2. Identify “ZIPAR” target

3. Identify changes 4. Identify 5. Identify changes 6. Assess

7. Identify significant 8. Identify all research/policy support 9. Identify strategic basis

Limitations of the Evaluation

SECTION 3: Analysis and Key Findings

3.1 Project Implementation

3.2 Project Governance and Management

• Head of Department – Department of Economics, University of Zambia;

3.3 Project Performance

Figure 2 Project Implementation Milestones

2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

End 2009-complete all

The public sector, private and civil society organisations

Design and Implementation Gaps

• Inadequate consultation with stakeholders and delayed effectiveness of the projects-

• Lack of coherent framework by GRZ. As a semi-autonomous policy research institute, the

• Absence of team-building events-There was no proper induction and or orientation of the

• Weak integration of sustainability/exit strategy-In the development of project document

ZIPAR’s knowledge management architecture is robust. It supports the development and

Table 1: Programme Budget Performance

Cost Centre Initial Percentage of Total Total Total Total % of total

TOTAL 1,500,034.00 100% 602,250.42 865,133.45 1,155,167.53 1,363,280.14 90.88%

Performance of Project Objectives

Table 2. Qualitative Assessment of Performance of Project Objectives

Objectives Level of Comments/Reasons

*(scale: very high to very low)

Table 3: Performance of key Deliverables

Key Achievements Remarks

Provide training 52 people trained 27 parliamentary staff trained in economic

Conduct Over 50 research completed The research comprises of 40 core research

Other notable achievements include:

According to stakeholder feedback, ZIPAR

The evaluation findings revealed that ZIPAR

4 [6 May 2013, The Post]: “Fitch Credit Ratings for Zambia”;

Some of the stakeholders interviewed

Influence on policy in Zambia

Engagement with Non-state Actors

Capacity Building and Training

Some of the training programmes that have been undertaken include:

Organisational sustainability is predicated on having managerial, marketing, human resource, financial

Table 4: Assessment of Pre-Mid-term Evaluation Risk

Risk Identified In Mid-Term CURRENT ASSESSMENT

Figure 3: Organisational life Cycle

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

adopted to further insulate ZIPAR in terms of appointing authority and sustenance of

Stakeholders/Policy Makers interviewed 3 – 14 November, 2014

REF NAME OF INSTITUTION FOCAL POINT PERSON CONTACT DETAILS

24 University of Zambia Dr. Felix Masiye-HOD, Economics +260 211 290475

25 University of Zambia Prof. Seshamani Venkatesh +260 211 290475

FIGURE 3: ZIPAR organisational structure (As per 2013-2017 Strategic plan)

Senior Research Fellow

Research Fellow – Research Fellow – Emerging Finance & Admin

Documentalist Accounts HR Support

ZIPAR Research Documents and Commentaries

 Used Motor Vehicle Imports: The Quest to Squash Lemons

ZIPAR INTERVIEW PICTURES