Country Sectoral and Institutional Context
Despite its regional mandate, during the next grant, CLEAR FA will be focusing on narrow set of countries and clients in order to maximize the achievement of results. The engagements will continue to respond to demand, but will also be chosen according to the following criteria: i) political and institutional stability of the country; ii) readiness of institutional structures and evidence of commitment to and demand for M&E in country and client; ii) likelihood that the specific engagement will lead to the expected outcomes and impacts; iii) likelihood that outcomes and impacts will provide demonstration effects for other countries or clients; iv) client interest in comprehensive and long term engagements and in appropriating and implementing M&E or capacity building models; and v) client willingness to pay fees or the possibility to leverage alternative sources of funding through donors. Given these criteria, the current target countries are: Senegal, Benin, and Niger. CLEAR FA also plans to gradually get involved in Côte d’Ivoire and the Republic of Congo, if the conditions evolve positively.
Senegal
Reforms, systems and actors involved in M&E. Senegal has several ongoing public reforms and political discourse of the highest authorities (President of the Republic, Prime Minister, etc.) favors Results-based Management and Public Policy Evaluation, as well as the need to promote the control of public resources for greater fiscal transparency and accountability. In 2016 the Page 1 of 17 constitutional reform expanded the powers of the National Assembly, which in addition to their traditional mandate to monitor government action, now has the prerogatives for the evaluation of public policies. The Government has also put forward the Senegal National Social and Economic Development Strategy 2013-2017 which aims to strengthen governance, institutions and peace. The Strategy addresses monitoring and evaluation, transparency and accountability, and emphasizes the importance of M&E capacity in government agencies (World Bank. 2013. Senegal—Country Partnership Strategy FY13-17, Washington DC, p, 7 11). The Senegalese Government also plans to strengthen its capacity in the areas of policy planning and monitoring and evaluation to support more effective implementation of its programs responding to aspirations of its citizens. (World Bank. 2013. p, 99). Even though Senegal does not have a coordinated M&E “system”, the Harmonized Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation of Public Policies (CASE) is a significant step forward. This instrument makes it possible to better coordinate mechanisms and arrangements for monitoring and evaluation, and it helps anchor the evaluation function under the authority of the President. CASE combines systems and information developed by the Presidency, the Prime Ministry, the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning, the Operational Office for Monitoring the Emerging Senegal Plan (BOS) and The Organization and Methods Office (BOM). It is responsible for (i) monitoring the implementation of public policies and plans, projects, programs and reforms; (ii) conducting periodic evaluation of public policies through the analysis of their impacts on populations and the environment; and (iii) collecting, sharing and disseminating public policy results. The 2015 "Senegal Emergent Plan" (PES), for social policy also emphasizes evaluation. And several other institutions, in particular the Court of Auditors, the General Inspectorate of State, BOM, and the Ministry of Economy and Finance, have evaluation mandates. The Senegalese civil society is also very active in advocating for accountability through evaluation. Emerging associations in the field of evaluation and results based management, such as SenEval, also play a very active role in advocating for the institutionalization of evaluation and strengthening young and emerging evaluators.
Evaluations Conducted and Use of Evaluation. The Memorandum signed with the World Bank within the framework of the Economic Policy Support Instrument stipulates that all projects and programs must be evaluated using the Costs - Benefits method prior to their inclusion in the Triennial Program of Public Investment (PTIP). However, due to a lack of budgetary resources and technical capacity, this measure is only applied partially. The main types of evaluation currently conducted in Senegal are ex-ante evaluation of projects and programs, ex-post evaluation of policies and projects / programs and mid-term and final evaluation. Impact evaluation is rarely done because it is very resource-intensive. The results of the evaluations are used to inspire the design or improvement of public policies. (For example, the results of the evaluation of the Program for Development of Education and Training--PDEF--have largely inspired the formulation and the design of the Quality and Equity Improvement Program.)
Remaining Challenges:
Center’s prior involvement in the Country. Senegal’s strong political stability by regional standards, and the fact that it is the host of the Center has led to extensive work in the country and a special expectation from local stakeholders, as reflected in the number of requests received by the Center and in the fruitful partnerships already achieved during the previous three years. In the past, the Center has supported and collaborated with BOM, SenEval, the West and Central Africa Regional Offices of UNICEF and UNWOMEN, Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar (Laboratoire FOCS), etc. Many other clients are demanding services, including the Ministry of Economy and Finance, Parliament, and other ECD Providers such as CRES, ENEA and MGP.
Benin
Reforms, systems and actors involved in M&E. Evaluation of public policy has been highlighted as an important function by the Government of Benin since 2007. In 2010, a diagnosis of national evaluation capacities led the Government to begin the process of institutionalization of evaluation, particularly by clarifying the Institutional framework, developing M&E tools, conducting evaluations, and building capacities a t the national level (the diagnosis was conducted by the Ministry of Evaluation of Public Policy with the participation of UNDP, conducted by Ian C. Davies and Dr. David Houinsa). Benin has developed a 10-year vision for evaluation through the National Evaluation Policy (2012-2021), covering the Strategic Development Guidelines, sectoral policies, public service activities and the action of decentralized communities. A formal system has also been set up through "CIEPP" (the Institutional Framework for Public Policy Evaluation), which identifies all evaluation stakeholders and specifies their roles. Formerly attached to the Prime Minister’s office and now to the General Secretary of the Presidency, the Office of Public Policy Evaluation (BEPP) is responsible for conducting public policy and program evaluations at the national level, disseminating information, capitalizing on knowledge and building capacities. Monitoring and evaluation of projects and programs of sectoral ministries is the responsibility of BEPP's focal points in these ministries. The Observatory of Social Change (OCS) is the institution responsible for evaluating the impact of poverty reduction programs. Evaluations are managed by state institutions, but they are conducted by independent consultants and firms to ensure the impartiality of the reports. The Beninese parliament is also aware of the importance of evaluation; and even though there is no formal legal framework governing evaluation, there is strong pressure from civil society and some opinion leaders to include evaluation in the constitution. Academic institutions are increasingly introducing evaluation into their training curricula. A biennial conference called “Beninese Evaluation Days” is regularly organized by the Office of Evaluation of Public Policy attached to the Presidency to mobilize all the national and international evaluation community around the challenges of institutionalization.
Evaluations and Use. The evaluations conducted are used by government, administration, civil society and beneficiaries. They are used by decision-makers (Council of Ministers), policy managers (Ministries, technical directors) and Technical and Financial Partners for information and decision-making purposes. They contribute to the development of new cycles of public policies and programs or to reorientations. Evaluations are rarely used for accountability or to inform the public because evaluation reports are not published.
Page 3 of 17Remaining Challenges:
Center’s involvement. The Center has already engaged in individual and institutional capacity building initiatives, and received requests from the Office of Evaluation for strengthening Beninese parliamentarians. It has also received a request to help set-up of a degree program in evaluation with the ENA (National School of Administration) of Benin, and Integrated support to BEPP. Also, the Center has forged strategic informal partnerships with BEPP and supported three editions of Benin Evaluation Days (2013, 2014 and 2015). Some others implementing partners in Benin (IREEP, UNICEF, etc.) were visited in order to develop more formal partnership. The fact that the system was able to weather the 2015 crisis, encourages continuation of the activities.
Niger
Reforms, systems and actors involved in M&E. Results-based management and monitoring and evaluation have been formally recognized by Law (No. 2011-20 of 8 August 2011). There is also a mechanism for monitoring and evaluating the Economic and Social Development Plan (PDES). It is coordinated by CSAG, the unit in charge the monitoring Government actions, which is housed in the Prime Minister's Office. This system is based on a participatory approach (vertical and horizontal) to assess the level of achievement of the sectoral results of public programs. At project and program level, monitoring and evaluation units have also been set up. At the level of civil society, there is a National Monitoring and Evaluation Association (RENSE), which is also very active in the African Evaluation Association (AfrEA). Niger hosted the AfrEA Conference in 2007.
Evaluations and Use. The evaluations carried out mainly focus on projects and programs, and most evaluations are initiated by donors. Public policy evaluations are rarely conducted. The most common types of evaluation are ex-ante and ex-post evaluations and very few are impact evaluations. The results of evaluations are used for design / improvement of public policies.
Remaining Challenges:
Center’s involvement. In 2012, the country has regained political stability with regularly scheduled elections, and with the previous grants, the Center started to deliver some services in Niger. In 2014, the Center delivered services to CSAG. In 2015, it delivered services to the High Commission for the Modernization of the State. The Center was also hired by the UNICEF Niger office to provide a workshop on theories of change for Ministries in charge of Nutrition Policy and support the elaboration of nutrition sector action plan. In 2016, the Finance and Budget Committee of the Parliament sent 27 parliamentarians to CESAG for capacity building in performance-based budgeting. These engagements have triggered other demands for the executive government, the Parliament, Technical and Financial Partners, civil society and VOPEs. Despite the challenges in the country, there is extensive demand and willingness to pay for CLEAR FA services in Niger, which contributes to the financial sustainability of the Center.
Côte d’Ivoire
Reforms, systems and actors involved in M&E. After the political crisis in 2010 and the return to the stability, there seems to be an emerging Government leadership in evaluation, reflected in the creation the Ministry of Planning and Development (MEMPD) and a participatory institutional framework for the monitoring and evaluation of development actions, with participation of different departments in charge of planning and statistics in sectoral ministries. MEMPD is the umbrella organization responsible for ensuring national coordination and promotion of monitoring and evaluation activities in the country. It manages the monitoring and evaluation of the national development plan by aggregating monitoring data from sector ministries, local and regional authorities, development partners and civil society organizations. Also, professional evaluation networks such as RISE, 2IEval, AFCOP have been progressivel y emerging.
Remaining Challenges:
Center’s involvement. Despite previous demands (i.e., from Ministry of Planning), and given the prior instability in the country, CLEAR has not yet provided services to Cote d'Ivoire. However, individuals have been trained by CLEAR in many topics. The Center has also already signed a memorandum of understanding with the GPE (Economic Policy Management) program, who will be an implementing partner in the country. The MEMPD (which has already submitted a request to be supported by CLEAR FA) and the Ministry of Economy and Finance have been identified as strategic clients for CLEAR interventions in Côte d'Ivoire.
Republic of Congo
System and actors involved. In 2012, an organic law was adopted introducing the Page 5 of 17 notion of "performance controlled by results" in the state budget. It states that "objectives and results associated with a program shall be evaluated within the framework of budgetary control". Achievement of results is measured annually at the time of review of the Settlement Act. The review is done through annual performance reports as well as special reports from parliamentary finance committees. The law gives parliament the task of evaluation.
Remaining Challenges:
Center’s involvement. The Center has not yet worked in Congo, but it has received significant demands from the country.
Sectoral and Institutional ContextPartnership Context
CLEAR (Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results) is a game-changing global monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is capacity development program created to respond to gaps in developing countries’ M&E capacities. It brings together academic institutions and donor partners to contribute to the use of evidence in decision-making by supporting the creation of M&E systems, and strengthening M&E skills and practices in client countries.
CLEAR has set up regional centers in competitively selected academic institutions in Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, Senegal, India and China. The centers have the mandate to deliver and to help replicate effective M&E capacity development services. They offer a menu of services to strategic partners and clients in their regions, including government, civil society, the private sector and other providers of M&E capacity services. Their services include technical assistance, knowledge and research services, and training. The Centers work at all levels of capacity building for M&E – the enabling environment, organizational and individual.
CLEAR has nine donor partners and a Global Hub (Secretariat) housed within the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group. The Global Hub administers the CLEAR Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) and anchors the overall program providing funding, strategic and other direct assistance to the regional Centers, to support their performance. It also facilitates cross-center learning and learning for the wider M&E Community, leveraging the Centers’ experiences to generate knowledge. Donor partners provide both funds and strategic guidance as part of their involvement in CLEAR’s governing bodies. They include the multilateral development Banks (Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, World Page 6 of 17 Bank), the Rockefeller Foundation, and bilateral donors (UK, Sweden, Switzerland, Australia, Belgium).
The African Center of Higher Education in Management (CESAG), based in Dakar, Senegal, was selected in 2012 to house the CLEAR Center for Francophone Africa (CLEAR FA). CESAG is an international non-profit public institution established in 1985 by the Heads of State of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) with the aim of accompanying regional integration through training, consultancy, and research in management. It was selected through an open and competitive process from among 22 candidates from the region because of its regional understanding and deep connections, the support and demand it received from governments, and its prestigious standing in capacity building.
The proposed regional grant is the third one provided to the Center. CESAG had an initial grant from CLEAR (P132789, for US$268,970, closed on May 30th, 2016) and a parallel IDF grant from the Africa region (P126603, for US$995,790, closed on November 10th, 2015). With these grants, the Center was successful in achieving its project development objectives to “strengthen the capacity of the Centre Africain d'Etudes Superieures en Gestion (CESAG), to provide customized M&E training and capacity development services to government and civil society in the Francophone Africa, allowing governments and civil society organizations in the region to request services from CESAG rather than relying on costly international service providers who are often not attuned to regional realities” (see P132789 ICR for details).
The focus of the first CLEAR grant was to set up the CLEAR Center (CLEAR FA) and build its own capacities, while increasingly offering a range of services to clients, including other providers of M&E services. CLEAR FA developed and implemented many basic and advanced courses in M&E and related subjects. Through its services, the center also started to promote M&E systems in the region and a culture of evaluation and evidence based policy-making.
With the first CLEAR grant and the IDF, the center has directly trained two hundred and eighty- six (286) professionals from government (49%), civil society and NGOs (25%) and others (26%) (academia, private sector, etc.). 33% of these trainees were women and fifteen countries have been reached. 97% of trainees were very satisfied with the quality of the courses taken. They revealed that the knowledge and new skills acquired are useful in their current job, and 88% of course participants who provided feedback assessed their “increase in knowledge and skills” as a result of the training as “high” (4.22 on a 5-point scale). The center also reached over 380 participants through knowledge sharing seminars and workshops. Additionally, one hundred and three (103) trainers were trained of which 55% were on basic M&E, 19% on impact evaluation, 12% on evaluation of Water Sanitation and Energy programs, and 15% on performance based-budgeting. 16% of these trainers were women. These trainers have, in turn, trained hundreds of other people (although the exact number is not currently being tracked by the Center) in their respective networks with the CLEAR courses and products in their own countries across the Francophone region.
During the next grant, the Center will sharpen its strategic focal areas and implementation processes. It will continue to develop and offer a wide range of services to strategically selected clients while maintaining high quality of services delivered. In order to cater to regional volatility, it will develop agile work programs that take into account and are able to respond to changing country and regional contexts. It will improve targeting of strategic customers by using a systematic client selection approach. During this new grant period, the Center will put more emphasis on “learning” by systematically tracking outcome-level results and sharing key knowledge Page 7 of 17 products. Also, since CLEAR has been conceptualized as “seed funding” with the objective that the Center and the services continue after the CLEAR MDTF phase, CLEAR FA will increasingly work towards its institutional and financial sustainability.
Regional and Institutional Context
“Most governments in Africa have accepted the imperative of regular elections which has increased the focus on delivery of public services and the need for accountability. Most importantly, the voice of non-state actors and their participation in the process of governance have radically increased in most countries, and the role of technology in promoting good governance by increasing access to information and facilitating collective action cannot be underestimated.” (World Bank, 2011. Regional Integration Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa - RIAS, 21).
At the same time, the Africa Region has experienced growth at much lower levels than expected in the past few years. Low commodity prices, high population growth, policy uncertainty, security issues, frequent natural disasters and capital inflow declines, pulled the regional growth and GDP per capita down significantly leading to the weakest performance in the region in the past two decades. (World Bank, 2017. Regional Update 2017: Africa Region, 4). Government finances remain under pressure across the region, with several countries recording government debt levels well above 40% of GDP. Chronic poverty remains high. Poverty reduction has been uneven, with fragile states lagging behind. In 2013, Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for more of the poor people than all other regions combined, and by 2016, the region accounted for half of the world’s poorest people. Data gaps also remain severe, limiting the ability to measure poverty. Due to unequitable development, big disparities persist in public service delivery.
As a result of these trends, client countries increasingly face pressures from government, civil society and the international community to achieve better results and instate better targeted, more transparent, and evidence based policy-making practices. At the same time, there has been an increase in democratization of the Francophone Africa region, increasing pressure on governments to take accountability and transparency more seriously.
Governments and other actors in the region have taken several actions that evidence advancements on the demand side for M&E and evidence based- policy making:
The market for M&E services has responded to these needs with advancements on the supply of M&E services:
However, despite these advancements, the region still faces severe constraints to institutionalizing evaluation and evidence based-policy making:
On the demand side, there are still significant pending challenges:
This situation has triggered vast support requests from Governments for support in introducing M&E reforms and creating a critical mass of professionals.
On the supply side, despite the advancements, there are also still significant gaps in M&E services and in capacity building for M&E (according to a study that CLEAR FA has recently carried out among all its institutional partners and strategic customers - key actors and stakeholders of evaluation in all the countries that it covers – in order to better understand their specific national contexts and local needs, to refine its response strategy and find its niche):
On the supply of capacity building services, despite increases in offers, significant gaps still exist:
This grant is in line with the World Bank Group’s priorities for regional support to Africa, which highlight the need for sustainable and inclusive growth, through improving service delivery, the quality of public spending, institutional capacities and accountability. The strategy for Africa emphasizes that governance should be strengthened and made into a cross-cutting theme. It also emphasizes the need to direct more resources to strengthening the knowledge, data collection and capacity building through partnerships with local institutions in Africa. (World Bank. 2017. Regional Update: Africa Region, Washington DC: World Bank, 21)
Moreover:
The grant aligns well with Cote d’Ivoire’s Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for the period of FY16-19. Both with one of its cross-cutting areas on “strengthening public financial management and accountability” (World Bank. 2015. Cote Page 12 of 17 d’Ivoire—Country Partnership Framework. Washington DC: World Bank, 16) and on the priorities to (ii) improve delivery of quality public services (health and water); (iii) improve allocative efficiency and quality of expenditures; and (iv) increase accountability and transparency in public expenditures (World Bank. 2015, 18). The grant supports the priorities stated by the Bank to improve the quality of expenditures: enhanced systems, processes and accountability for investment selection, financing, monitoring and evaluation. (World Bank. 2015, 48). It also supports some of the measures that Bank envisions for the country, such as the establishment of Directorate for the monitoring and evaluation of public contracts (World Bank. 2015, 29). It also supports the Bank’s efforts to improve central government’s performance based, and multi-year budgeting. It also aligns with governance projects: Support PFM Reforms (P151498), (FY17), DPO – Poverty Reduction Support Credit 3 (P155259) (FY17), DPO on Fiscal Management, Education & Energy (P158463) (FY17-19), DeMPA Ivory Coast (P155692) (FY17), PFM Modernization & Accountability (P159842) (FY18). (World Bank. 2015, 46-48 and Operations Portal).
The grant fully aligns with the CPS for Republic of Congo, of FY13-16, that aims to support the Government to better target its public investment program while increasing its efficiency, in a context of improved governance. This will mainly entail strengthening governance and Government capacity. World Bank. 2012. Republic of Congo—Country Partnership Strategy for FY13-16, Washington DC: World Bank, 17, 20). It aligns with the emphasis made during stakeholder consultations with academia, civil society organizations, parliamentarians, the private sector, development partners and Government officials, around the need for greater transparency and accountability (World Bank. 2012, 17). It builds on the work of the ongoing Transparency and Governance Capacity Project II (P122990) (FY13), which includes among other things, extending a results-based management approach to Ministries of Planning, Finance, Health, Transport, Energy, Trade and Small & Medium Enterprises (p. 20). It also builds on the “Statistical Development Project” (P133731) (FY14-19) which aims to strengthen Government capacity to generate and use statistics and monitoring and evaluation, and support informed policy and investment decisions, measure the impact of programs, adopt results-based culture, and ensure transparency and accountability (World Bank. 2012, 20). It also supports the Bank’s objective to reinforce the capacity of Parliament, selected CSOs and the media to exercise greater public scrutiny, linked to the project Transparency and Governance Capacity Project II (P122990) (FY13), which supports monitoring of governance reforms, gathering of feedback on quality of public services, monitoring budget execution, among other actions. It also supports the work of the Improved Governance Policy Framework (P160840) (FY17), and the Integrated Public Sector Reform Project (P160801) (FY17), to improve governance and Government capacity.
Indicators and targets
|
Indicator |
Baseline(2017) |
2018 |
2019 |
December 2020 |
|
% of CLEAR FA’s strategic clients and M&E capacity providers who rate “increase in knowledge and/or skills” as a result of participating in its training and workshop services, highly (4 or 5 on five-point scale), as measured through feedback forms after delivery of service. |
88 |
89 |
90 |
90 |
|
% of CLEAR FA’s strategic clients and M&E capacity providers who rate the extent to which they applied concepts learned (for training services) or adopted recommendations made (for advisory services) to make changes in their current work high or significant, as measured through tracer surveys. |
Page 14 of 17
N/A |
40 |
50 |
60 |
|
Number of new knowledge products for strategic clients and M&E capacity providers |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
Proportion of non-CLEAR MDTF funds (including fees for services, and cash contributions from donors and host institution) relative to total funds (including CLEAR MDTF and non-CLEAR MDTF funds)
|
27 |
40 |
60 |
70 |
Page 15 of 17