Title: Monitorimi i Shpenzimeve Publike
Author: nmullaj
Last saved by: Ján Andruch
Company: Ministria e Financave

Monitoring Public Expenditures – Report Card Project

1	Introduction

The effective execution of public expenditures, their objectives achievement, minimization of all institutional and information difficulties and weakness faced during the implementation, give an important place to the creation of a monitoring and evaluation system for all government agencies. A statistical capacity building in data collection and analyses should support this system.   

Public expenditure monitoring process and clarification of institutional responsibilities of the government agencies and local authorities with transparence ensure the participation of all interested groups, public society and especially the poor, to express their opinions and evaluations related to the efficiency in using public funds. The monitoring process will identify problems related to the corruption of public administration. It will encourage in deep studying of the main problems, suggesting the ways for future improvement.       

The main goal of monitoring is systematic data collection and analyses for a clear understanding of the effects of public services, especially to the poor. The monitoring process, usually requires data on national level, local level or for households in specific time intervals and frequently. The methodology is very simple, based on comparisons of the achieved level to the projected level (or the previous level).  

2	Main Objectives of Monitoring

Targets that a country wants to achieve require many efforts and the identification of resources to define the priority objectives.  The designation of clear objectives can increase the transparency of public expenditure allocation process and create the basis for a successful monitoring of policies. 

The definition of indicators related to the targets, depends on the country circumstances and it is based on technical analyses of poverty diagnoses. Participation is very important for this process; it gives to different levels of society, especially the poor, the possibility to determine priorities in achieving targets through direct dialog. A systematic and transparent monitoring system will play a primary role in the effectiveness of the public services, economic growth and poverty reduction. The main monitoring objectives are: 
•	Monitoring of economic growth and poverty reduction progress;
•	Guarantee a systematic evaluation of public expenditures;
•	Implement an advisory process, considering the opinions of the poor;
•	Expand the participation in monitoring the implementation of public services; 
•	Create an appropriate institutional system for monitoring and evaluation.

Some specific features related to monitoring objectives, taking into consideration economic growth and poverty reduction programs are: 
-	Critical role of participation: Civil society, especially the poor, can be integrated in different phases of public services monitoring. So, the monitoring system should be build in a way that it can adjust and make valuable data collection from different sources;
-	Inclusion of an evaluation strategy. Such a strategy is very important for monitoring system. Chosen programs and policies can be evaluated in purpose to determine what is the effect of specific public services in meeting country objectives;
-	Dissemination and use of results. The most important issue here is the transparency and responsibility with results. Monitoring results should be disseminated through different mechanisms and different groups of civil society, creating a clear link of these results with decision-making policies that will be undertaken. 

3	Building a Monitoring System

The main requirements for designation of a monitoring system related to public services should be resolved: 
•	Selection of main indicators related to public services objectives (by areas, gender, age etc);
•	Projection of targets in a concrete and quantitative way, setting levels for main indicators;
•	Need for data collection, monitoring frequency and institutional capacity building for monitoring;

Monitoring systems require a responsible mechanism for decision-making policies. In the Mid-Term government strategy for Social and Economic Development are given clear directions for creation of a monitoring system. Monitoring indicators express and quantify strategy objectives and their projected values. The indicators are divided into final and intermediary indicators. The long-term objectives of the country's development have been taken into account in the identification of the final indicators and their intended values. 

Building an institutionalized monitoring and evaluation system and progressive enforcement of its capacities are considered as key elements for an effective use of public funds. The institutional monitoring and evaluation system will be implemented in all government agencies and local authorities and it will include civil society structures as well. The Mid-Term development strategy defines that an important role in monitoring, despite government structures, will play the National Civil Society Advisory Group, which will guarantee the civil society collaboration in monitoring process and it will give recommendations for further steps. Building of such structures will be supported by government sources and international partners following enhancement of capacities that exists in non-government organizations.  

Monitoring process is strongly related to data collection in a proper way, which will be used for measuring indicators. Institutions data system in national and local level and data systems of specialized agencies will be data sources for monitoring. The main monitoring and evaluation instruments will be: (i) Living Standard Measurement Survey (LSMS), which will be conducted periodically; (ii) Survey of Poverty Quality Assessment; (iii) Administrative maps of poverty data; (iv) Direct questionnaires with service beneficiaries.

We’ll be focused in the last instrument with the aim of considering beneficiaries opinions on the usefulness of public services and listening the voice of the poor. This process will increase the participation of civil society in monitoring and evaluation of public services through a “Report Card”.  

“Report Card”, an instrument for including civil society in monitoring of public services. 

The report card is based on a survey of selected household representatives. The household is the base unit of our analyses, because it is the base unit of government actions, private sector and civil society organizations. It is the direct beneficiary of public services, aiming poverty reduction and economic growth. The household itself makes decisions, often in group by its members, for accepting public or/and private services taking into consideration benefits and costs (from monetary point of view) accompanying each of them.    

The survey is based on a client evaluation for public services (how much are they satisfied with these services), in accordance with the objectives of Anti-Corruption Strategy, Social and Economic Development Strategy and Monitoring indicators. It offers recommendations for sector and sub-sector policies, in which directions should be focused the fight against corruption and how. The survey offers ideas for strategies and programs to simplify and improve public services allocation, especially to the poor.  

Survey objectives and targets

The main objective is monitoring public services. The report card will identify key problems that the poor face in receiving public services, their opinions on quality and quantity of these services and the treatment they receive from the agents, especially government officials. The survey will be focused on three main issues related to public services:  
1.	If public services achieve their targets;
2.	If specific projects are efficient or not;
3.	If government agencies are effective in accomplishing needs, responsible and accurate in implementing legislation for public services. 

Report card results should be used as a test for policies undertaken and their conclusions, focusing more on the quality of public services. The level of corruption in using public funds will be evaluated through this process.  

Implementation methodology 

The survey methodology will be focused on a questionnaire. The questionnaire will be prepared on the basis of three main topics:
1.	The efficiency of public services;
2.	Aspects of these services, which are satisfactory or not;
3.	Direct and indirect costs in using public funds.

The questionnaire will include 7 (seven) modules. Five of them will be focused on five important areas as follow: 
i)	Health care;
ii)	Elementary education;
iii)	Safe water; 
iv)	Housing and;
v)	Electricity supply. 

The sixth module will include demographic and socio-economic data for households, while the seventh module will have information on household expenditures. 

The questionnaire will include, aspects of clients self-confidence, their involvement and using services on behalf of the poor offered by government, private sector and others; total expenditures of households and parts of it used for services; the degree of satisfaction with public services in general and in specific categories and also, clients suggestions for improving public programs. 						 

The Report Card will modify and classify the weights used in aggregating the responses into net satisfactions scores along the following lines: very satisfied accorded a weight of plus two (2), somewhat satisfied plus one (1), undecided zero (0), somewhat dissatisfied minus one (-1), and very dissatisfied minus two (-2).

Unlike opinion polls, report cards present views of people regarding service encounters that they have experienced first-hand. The Report Card methodology requires (i) adequate financing, (ii) time commitment, and (iii) interest to sustain its use for policy monitoring over time.

Process execution. 

Public expenditures monitoring, through “Report Card”, will be executed in four main phases, classified as follow:

i)	Preparation and projections. This phase involves the preparation of the questionnaire and selection of households. Consultations with different groups from service users, government, private sector, civil society, should take place in purpose of preparation of the questionnaire. The survey terrain of execution will be divided into different study areas, where households will be selected proportionally to the number of population and rural/urban areas. The first household will be selected randomly and the others afterward, will be selected using a fixed interval. Income level, education level, gender etc, will be taken into consideration in household selection, beside different areas of living.  

ii)	Statistical and analytical data collection. First step of this phase will be a training period for the staff that will execute the interviews and this activity will last two weeks. Training activities will consist of: (1) one or two days of giving basic information on the project; (2) practice exercises with interviewers, to familiarize them with this job and the questionnaire; (3) interviews in practice under the observation of a supervisor until the interviewers can work alone. The survey execution in fact and the presentation of collected data by tables will follow after the training activities. A range will be made for each category of services and issue incorporated in the questionnaire, according to the level of satisfaction and specific agencies. 

iii)	Dissemination of results and their analyses. At the beginning, the report card results should be presented to the main authorities and after that, the results should be publicized in the media and press to give information to the public. The most important part of this phase is the organization of seminars and workshops, where officials from government, private sector and civil society will participate.  Through those seminars, it will be possible for different government agencies to exchange their experiences based on the data-tables of the report card. Consultations with citizens and public officials should be organized to give their reaction by comparing report card results and their sector’s data. This will help to improve the Report Card process in the future.

iv)	Final report and process support. This final phase has the aim of preparation of a final report for the process. The report should identify the most problematic sectors, where the level of corruption is higher and irregularities in using public funds are bigger. The final report should provide important conclusions on measures to be taken and different recommendations for improving the allocation and execution of public services in the future. This phase is very important for institutionalization of the Report Card. 

More specifically, in the final report will be evaluated and analyzed the following indicators and issues; 

1.	The degree of fulfillment of society needs through public services and their effectiveness in general;
2.	Public services costs compare to benefits for society;
3.	Impact level of public services in poverty reduction;
4.	The efficiency degree in specific projects;
5.	The effectiveness of using public funds from government agencies, creating a range from the highest to the lowest;
6.	Corruption level related to public services;
7.	Identification of public sectors with highest level of corruption;
8.	Communication level of public administration with service beneficiaries;
9.	Suggestions for improving policies and reforms in the future.

Survey results and conclusions.

The Report Card process will create the possibility for civil society to be involved and citizen’s voice to be listened giving suggestions to different government structures, identifying corruption levels and encourage public officials to be more active in dealing with the biggest problems that our society faces. Monitoring results will be presented to public service providers and other representatives through media and workshops that will be organized. The participants will confirm the result values and they will make a number of suggestions for further analyses. 

Monitoring results should be presented to all state institutions, central and local, private sector, non-governmental organizations, foreign donors etc. These results should be analyzed in details, generally and by geographical zones, urban/rural localities, level of income etc. They will help for a good measurement of the poverty level based on a classification by household expenditures. Political support is very important in this process, and monitoring results will be more effective if the government will implement new reforms. Public sectors monitored should take into consideration the results of this process and improve their activity using beneficiaries’ opinions.    

The possibility of comparisons between different agencies, identifying the less efficient ones and encouraging them for internal reforms is another advantage of the process. This process increases the effects of public pressures for changes and this is another achievement. Civil society becomes more conscious for its role.  

Institutionalization 

The Report Card will guarantee an advising and monitoring mechanism for service providers and policy-makers, and also a possibility for them to listen directly their clients. The Report Card is not perfect at the beginning, but it will have continues improvement with its frequency and institutionalization. The Institutionalization of the Report Card, as an instrument for monitoring public services in a specific agency, will combine the results with the process of public expenditures allocation. This process will have the advantage of creating linkage with budget allocation not only for the previous period, but also creating conditions for improvement in the future.     

The institutionalization of the report card should start by its repetition firstly in a one-year period, building a program based in the first survey results. The repetition of the program will last, i.e. for five years. The program will be improved in all its components, because of repetition and frequency. Different indicators for different sectors and periods will be compared, focusing on improvement of public services and Report Card effects on this improvement.