Skip to Main Navigation

The development of monitoring and evaluation capacities to improve government performance in Uganda : Desarrollo de la capacidad de seguimiento y evaluacion para mejorar el desempeno del estado en Uganda (Espanhol)

The analysis takes the functioning of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) within the Uganda public sector, rather than the needs and requirements of the external donor community, as its main point of departure. The objective of M&E is seen as the improvement of the performance and effectiveness of government and its public service delivery system. M&E relates to more than the technical aspects of data collection: it ultimately derives its value not from the availability of accurate data per se, but from the way in which they are used to improve decision-making. M&E functions when it supplies managers with a flow of reliable information and analysis about what works and what doesn't as a basis for policy recommendations, optimizing resource allocation, refining institutional strategies, changing the mix of public service products or suppliers, assessing performance of staff, or underpinning accountability requirements. Because M&E addresses the performance of governments in responding to their citizens' needs and priorities, it is ultimately an issue of good public governance.


  • Autor

    Hauge,Arild O.

  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Documento de Trabalho (Série Numerada)

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País


  • Região

    Regiões Mundiais,

  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Desarrollo de la capacidad de seguimiento y evaluacion para mejorar el desempeno del estado en Uganda

  • Palavras-chave

    public service delivery;Household Income and Expenditure Survey;Demographic and Health Survey;monitoring and evaluation system;absolute poverty line decrease;public expenditure tracking survey;decentralization of service delivery;point of departure;sector working;availability of data;government service delivery;public sector reform;national service delivery;flow of fund;expenditure tracking studies;public management reform;availability of information;national poverty eradication;data quality;term of people;government service providers;public service provider;structure of incentive;data collection system;public service management;government budget process;cost of travel;accumulation of data;lack of demand;service delivery process;degree of assurance;public management system;assignment of responsibility;performance measure and;national budget process;integrated financial management;medium-term expenditure framework;degree of performance;release of fund;standard of accountability;observed poverty reduction;quality of public;flow of resource;senior government official;medium term expenditure;Human Immunodeficiency Virus;poverty reduction goal;internal accountability mechanism;analysis of poverty;Planning and Operations;service delivery chain;rate of growth;national development planning;incidence of poverty;budget execution problems;impact on poverty;areas of service;inspection activity;Public Services;accountability institution;donor community;budget support;reporting requirement;public finance;operational management;external assistance;water sector;public action;budget analysis;routine monitoring;active participant;information collection;reporting system;public affair;Economic Management;policy formulation;national authority;government operation;public accountability;performance management;continuous assessment;poverty outcome;public monitoring;budget resource;stakeholder consultation;budget cycle;outcome targets;information flow;operational function;qualitative dimension;accountability requirement;household poverty;district planning;population survey;focus group;poverty impact;donor support;non-governmental organization;government decision-makers;poverty trend;daily operation;reform effort;quality datum;delivery targets;political level;public governance;budget request;institutional responsibilities;external source;local stakeholder;information standard;expenditure quality;national progress;poverty indicator;program objectives;recipient countries;parent-teacher association;school completion;domestic demand;central coordination;data system;government action;independent assessment;institutional environment;inspection visit;national decision-makers;health clinics;sound management;bureaucratic requirement;evaluation association;professional body;research exercise;personnel management;indigenous capacity;public notice;governance reform;understanding poverty;skill formation;limited resources;awareness building;long-term process;clear view;performance information;accountability framework;public perception;Budget Management;common problems;organizational development;basic school;target setting;external support;public funding;National Institutions;reporting obligation;water point;effective participation;annual disbursement;research institution;sector-wide approaches;parallel financing;separate agreement;decentralized management;increasing share;anticorruption law;account committee;budget reform;expenditure monitoring;expenditure plan;poverty study;poverty research;anticorruption strategy;anticorruption effort;research institutions;government establishment;funding support;operational planning;budget framework;Macroeconomic Stability;expenditure reduction;annual expenditure;primary health;Agricultural Extension;systems approach;performance culture;logistical resource;donor coordination;transaction cost;government spending;fund allocations;draft policy;effective monitoring;performance orientation;donor funding;Natural Resources



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.