Transcript MfDR CAP-Scan www.MfDR.org/capscan - [email protected] Ingwell Kuil - World Bank Abdel Aziz Ould Dahi - Mauritania Civil Service College, Singapore 2009

1
MfDR CAP-Scan
www.MfDR.org/capscan - [email protected]
Ingwell Kuil - World Bank
Abdel Aziz Ould Dahi - Mauritania
Civil Service College, Singapore 2009
Guiding Principles
South-South knowledge sharing
Ongoing improvements to methodology
Theoretical: How it works
Practice: How to get it done
Realistic: Continuous effort in country
Managing for Development Results
Development of a results culture
Shift from focusing on inputs to performance
Evidence-based decision making
Clear goals, monitoring and evaluation
Accountability to deliver results
A global urgency to focus on Results
Improve development outcomes and results on the
ground
Improve country systems to Manage for Development
Results
Implement Results Based approaches
MDGs, Paris Declaration, Accra Agenda for Action
Korea 2011 4th High Level Forum
Development of CAP-Scan
Roundtable on MfDR in Hanoi (2007)
OECD/DAC Joint Venture on MfDR
Working group of AsDB, AfDB, CIDA, EC, IADB, MSI,
MCC, UNDP, USAID, World Bank, partner countries
Methodological sources:
UNDP: Capacity Assessment Tool; CIDA: Capacity selfassessment tool; EC: Institutional Assessment and
Capacity Development; WB: PEFA; Etc.
Experiences in Mauritania, Niger, Senegal
CAP-Scan instrument
Broad-based, high-level, short-term, low-cost selfassessment by governments to identify strengths and
capacity needs, develop actions to address resource
needs, and target donor support:
A framework on development performance
Evidence-based decision-making tool
Simple and practical tool for strategic planning, risk
management, and monitoring and evaluation of results
Scope
Focus on the five MfDR pillars:
1 Leadership,
2 Evaluation & Monitoring,
3 Accountability & Partnerships,
4 Planning & Budgeting,
5 Statistics
Matrix
MfDR Pillars
Components
Criteria For Each Progressive Stage
Awareness
Exploration
Transition
Full Implementation
Leadership
Commitment
A small number of
Full commitment within
All units practice comprehensive and
Top management asserts
managers investigate
government to MfDR. New
systematic MfDR systems. Staff
importance of MfDR. But
MfDR tools, and apply MfDR practices are systematically
report benefits outweigh costs of
no concrete initiatives have them sporadically. But,
adopted. Most, but not all, staff,
MfDR. Organization is learning how
been initiated.
initiative is not consistent, support initiative and most, but not
to use, and continuously adapt MfDR.
nor mandated.
all units practice MfDR.
MfDR informs
policy
A thorough array of results-based Results-based management systems
At least a few decisions are
data-grounded decision- and
are utilized in virtually all relevant
Although leaders claim that
taken based on hard data. policy-making support systems are areas. These systems are adequately
evidence should be
However, these are the
installed in some units.
funded, staff at all levels appreciate
integrated into policy
exceptions in an
Leadership emphasizes the
their utility, they use data to revise
processes – reliable data are
environment where data are importance of such systems and
policy and procedures, and systems
not collected or used.
seldom available or used.
indicates that they should be
are in place to continuously improve
harmonized and used universally.
them.
National
planning
National Development Plan
exists. However, outcomes
and targets – even for such
areas as poverty reduction
or health – are not clearly
articulated.
National Development Plan
articulates outcomes, and
maybe even some specific
targets. However, that
discipline is not
consistently applied
throughout the Plan.
National Development Plan clearly
articulates outcomes, results, and
measurable targets against which
programs can be measured.
However, data are not
systematically collected and used
by decision makers. “Ownership”
of the Plan and its data are not
widespread.
Outcomes, results and targets area
consistently and appropriately applied
throughout the National Development
Plan. Relevant data are collected and
used to adapt implementation of the
plan. Decision-makers recognize the
utility of the data and ensure it is
integrated into the decision-making
process.
Process
1. Scope tasks
2. Identify
participants
10.Implement
improvement
9. Plan
improvement
3. Craft process
8. Prioritize
improvement
4. Adapt tools
7. Identify emerging &
advanced aspects of
MfDR
5. Collect data
6. Analyze /
present results
Products
11
Benefits for the client
Raise government consciousness of MfDR, in the local
context
Help government chart its own path to MfDR
Facilitate cross-organizational cooperation
Promote participation and consensus
Map a prioritized plan for improvement with focused
follow-up
Measure progress against the plan
Link with other tools
Introduction to a broad intervention post CAP-Scan
Niger
Senegal
Mauritania
Lessons learnt
Quality Assurance Team
Benchmark with non-governmental actors
Action Planning
Link to implementation
Link to other initiatives
Increasing cooperation with Regional CoPs on MfDR
Establishment of Advisory Committee
Rationale
Inter-sectoral character of capacities adds complexity
to the search for solutions
Capacity Building was identified as a long-term goal
The CAP-Scan is an opportunity to develop an
improvement plan
•
•
•
•
Self-assessment by senior government officials
Cross-cutting groups
Setting capacity building priorities
Concrete action plan that integrates existing efforts
Team
Process planning
June 30 - July 8
Sector
Meetings
• SelfAssessment
• Group
Discussion
Launch
July 6 – 11
Preparation for
Working
Sessions
• Consolidation
and synthesis
July 12 & 15
Working
Sessions
• SelfAssessment
• Priorities
• Action Plan
• Monitoring
Results per MfDR pillar
Mauritania
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
Mauritania
1.5
1
0.5
0
Leadership
Evaluation and Monitoring
Accountability and
Partnerships
Planning and Budgeting
Statistics
Results per dimension
Leadership
Commitm
ent
MfDR informs
policy
Involvement of Non governmental
stakeholders
Accountability and
Delegation
Donor coordination and alignment with
national priorities
Linking the field and the capital
Change
Management
Human Resource
Management
National Development Plan evaluation
systems
Monitoring and Evaluation Capacity
Data management capability
Suivi et Evaluation
Government performance is oriented
toward results
Data management capability
Reporting harmonization
Judicial Independence
Legislative Oversight
Redevabilité et contrôle
Independent
media
Public access to results
Budget reflects national
priorities
Performance based budgeting
Internal Coordination
Processus budgétaire
Statistiques
Inter-sectoral Coordination
Statistics
strategy
Data
Disaggregation
Data quality
assessment
Survey capability
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
Priority = combinaison Importance, Feasibility, Urgence
Identification of priorities
Action
requested
Commitment
4
3
2
1
Management of
change
Budget reflects
National priorities
Data quality
assessment
MfDR informs
policy
Efforts without
significant
returns
1
« Quick win » ?
Public access to
information
2
3
Score of self-assessment
No urgent action
needed
4
Action Plan
Dimensi
on
Programmed actions
Indicat
or/
Monito
r-ing
Refere
nce
situatio
n
Target
situatio
n
Schedu
le
Financing
Obta
in-ed
Obta
inable
Sour
ce
Resp.
Exec.
Prep
arati
on
Executi
on
Prio
r-ity
Comment/Conn
ec-tion with
existing action
Leadership
Commitment
CAPScan
1.1.1
Promulgate law
organizing the monitoring
and evaluation system of
the CSLP
Law
adopt
ed
1.1.2
Extend the sector CDMST:
MFPMA, MPEFP, MC
No.
depts.
CDMT
1.1.3
Study of capacitystrengthening needs of
the coordination
structure for
governmental action (DG
of Interministerial
Coordination) to ensure
performance of the
coordination, facilitation
and support roles at the
interministerial level.
1.1.4
General introduction of a
specialized body or unit
responsible for strategic
programming in the MPM
and MC.
Clarity and articulation of vision
3.0
7
1
TO + 6
month
s
MEF
10 to
TO + 1
yr
MEF/
other
departments
MEF
for
submis
s-ion to
PM
%
direct/
Dept
60%
CAPScan
3.0
100%
by TO
+6
month
s
Ministr
y
submit
s to PM
Adjustment of
organization
charts
1
Action Plan and dissemination
Six priority areas were identified
Actions were developed in a full group discussion,
including all key ministries
Actions focused on new action areas and refining existing
projects
The Director General of the Development and Economic
Cooperation of the MOF agreed to take the lead on
follow-up actions
The Action Plan was disseminated to donors in-country to
support the actions
MfDR CAP-Scan
Workshop Civil Service College, Singapore 2009
Ingwell Kuil & Abdel Aziz Ould Dahi
Workshop process
1. Use the ‘matrix’ to discuss the stage of development
regarding the MfDR system in your country
2. Describe the main arguments of your discussion in the
‘journal’ and quantify the results
3. Graph the quantitative results in the ‘profile’
4. Prioritize the results you’ve identified in the ‘prioritization
matrix’
5. Use the prioritization matrix to make an ‘action plan’
26
1. CAP-Scan matrix
MfDR Self-Assessment Matrix
MfDR Pillars
CRITERIA FOR EACH PROGRESSIVE STAGE
Components
Awareness
Exploration
Transition
Full Implementation
LEADERSHIP
Commitment to Results
Management
Deputy and assistant Deputy
assert importance of MfDR.
But no concrete initiatives have
been initiated.
Evidenced-based policy
processes
National Development Plan
2. CAP-Scan journal
Some managers investigate
MfDR tools, and apply some in
ad hoc manner. But, initiative
is not consistent, nor mandated.
x
Full commitment within organization
to MfDR. New practices
systematically adopted to MfDR.
Most, but not all, staff, support
initiative and most, but not all units
practice MfDR.
x
All units practice
comprehensive and systematic
MfDR systems. Staff report
benefits outway costs of
MfDR. Organization is
learning how to use, and
continuously adapt MfDR.
x
Public consultation in
planning and policy making
Self-Assessment Development Calculation Sheet (IDCS)
Organization:
Ghana Ministry of Planning: Aug-08
Jun-07
Aug-08
Score
Score
Pillar
Components
Leadership
Commitment
2.00
3.00
Evidence
National
Development
Plan Results
Mgt.
1.00
1.00
2.00
4.00
1.67
2.67
Comments
Four of five units have instituted Results Frameworks and
Program Monitoring Plans. Data are produced regularly for
those units and some decisions are made on data. The
remaining unit is expected to adopt systems next year.
3. CAP-Scan profile
No Change
National Development Plan now has full sets of results
measures and ministries are reporting on progress against
those indicators. Twice annual meetings of cabinet to review
progress against indicators.
Ghana Ministry of Planning
Self Assessment Profile: 2007-2008
Awareness
Exploration
Pillars
Leadership
Results Commitment
Evidenced-Based Mgt.
Public Consultation
Evaluation and Monitoring
M & E Capacity
Client Satisfaction Survey
Accountability & Feedback
Financial Resources
External Resources
Network Resources
Service Delivery
Active Membership
Legend:
Baseline: as of 2007
Mid-Course: as of 2008
End of period: 2009
Transition
Full Implementation
3. CAP-Scan profile
5. CAP-Scan action plan
Ghana Ministry of Planning
Self Assessment Profile: 2007-2008
Awareness
Exploration
Transition
Full Implementation
Capacity Improvement Result 1: {enter priority capacity result improvement desired}
Pillars
Leadership
Results Commitment
Performance Indicator(s):
Evidenced-Based Mgt.
Public Consultation
Activities
Evaluation and Monitoring
M & E Capacity
Resources
needed
Sources
Completio
n date
Client Satisfaction Survey
1.
Accountability & Feedback
2.
3.
4.
Financial Resources
5.
External Resources
Network Resources
4. CAP-Scan prioritization
Service Delivery
Active Membership
Legend:
Baseline: as of 2007
4
3
Quadrant indicating
areas needing most
urgent attention
M&E
Capacity
(3)
3
MfDR Priority Ranking
End of period: 2009
4
Mid-Course: as of 2008
Public
Consultation
(3)
2
1
Results
Related to
Budget (1)
1
Informs
Policy (3)
Matrix Progress Scoring
2
2
3
3
Matrix Progress Scoring
4
4
Person
Responsible