Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys in Uganda (PETS)

Zerubabel OjooManagement Systems and Economic Consultants Ltd.UgandaEmail:stalight@africaonline.co.ugMay 3 2005

2

What is PETS?

• Diagnostic or monitoring tool to understand problems in budget execution.

delays/ predictability of public funding. leakage/ shortfalls in public funding. discretion in allocation of resources.

What PETS does?• Collect data from different levels of

government, including service delivery units• Rely on record reviews, but also head

teacher/health facility manager interviews• Vary design depending on perceived

problems, country, and sector.

3

Background: What motivated the PETS in Uganda?

• Pioneer study in 1996.

• Motivated by observation of stagnant enrolment despite substantial increase in public spending on education

• Increased public spending on education was expected to translate into improvement in social indicators;enrolment,Pupil/Teacher and Pupil/ classroom ratios etc.

• This was not the case.

• Study was designed to compare budget alloca-tions to actual spending at various levels of governments and primary schools.

4

Process and Steps of the Survey

Formation of Task Force comprising of key ministries; finance, education and local government working with independent consultants and WB staff. Consultants reported to the Task Force.

Sample of 250 schools from 18 districts out of a total of 39 districts at the time. About 100 health facilities were visited.

Collect data from different levels of government; relevant central ministries, 18 districts and 250 schools

Based on availability of data, focus of the study was on capitation grants disbursed to primary schools.

Duration of 6 months to complete the assignment.

5

On average 13 percent of annual capitation grant (per student) from central government reached schools during 1991-1995

87 percent captured by district officials for purposes unrelated to education; and considered “leakage”. This proved initial suspicion of failing finance link.

Schools in poor areas were less able than others to claim their entitlements of capitation.

Poor quality services in comparison to public spending.

Main Findings of the Survey

6

What Happened after the Survey?

Mass public information campaign was launched by government reducing capture to 20 percent.

What made a significant difference was the campaign and willingness by government to accept the results and make the necessary policy changes to improve service delivery.

Information campaign empowers beneficiaries and strengthens accountability relationships between service providers and users at little cost.

The replication of the study in other sectors; health and water as well as public information campaign in other programs.

Institutionalization of PETS as a standard tool of public expenditure management several sectors.

Over 4 focused PETS undertaken; results disseminated to a very a wide audience and follow up action plans decided.

7

Newspaper campaign to cut capture in Uganda Main national newspapers (2) and their local

language editions

Monthly transfers of capitation grants to districts published in newspapers since 1996

-Parents will know what there entitlements are

Posters required at district HQs announcing the date and amount funds received

Schools required to maintain public notice boards/posters displaying receipts

-Parents will know what the actual receipts are

Subsequently expanded to other sectors

8

9

10

Ugandan schools received more of what they were due after a newspaper campaign

Source: Reinikka and Svensson (2001), Reinikka and Svensson (2003a)

11

Outcome

Generated a lot of concern about public spending in relation to outputs, outcomes and impact especially among the donors.

Invitations to present the findings of the survey were received.

Accordingly presentation of survey results were made to EU countries represented in Uganda, NGOs; and senior cabinet ministers including the Prime Minister and the Vice President.

Report was widely circulated; requests for it were received one year after the study.

WB documented the study. To assist other countries to use this diagnostic tool,

International training on PETS conducted in Cambodia(2004) and South Africa(2005); facilitated by WB and IIEP in Paris.

12

Lessons from Uganda Through an inexpensive policy action,

mass information through the press, Uganda has managed dramatically to reduce capture of a public program aimed at increasing primary education

Because the poor were less able than others to claim their entitlement from district officials before the campaign, but just as likely in 2001, they benefited most from it

Public access to information is a powerful deterrent of local capture

13

Concluding remarks With proper survey techniques it is possible to

collect useful quantitative data on frontline service provision to help- Policymaking- Supervision- Generate “client power” and strengthen “voice”

Conventional mechanisms, such as audits, inspections, and legislative reviews not enough

Need to complement by enhancing client power, i.e., parents’ ability to monitor performance of schools and improve the clients’ bargaining power- Information is crucial