Title: The Cases of Chile and Colombia
1The Cases of Chile and Colombia
Presentation to a LAC Region Summer Seminar 9 A
ugust 2006 Keith Mackay Independent Evaluation
Group (kmckay_at_worldbank.org)
2What Does Success Look Like?-- Why Countries
Want an ME System
- To support budget decision-making
performance-based budgeting
- To support national and sectoral planning
- To design policies and programs
- To assist sector ministries / agencies in their
management
- To strengthen accountability relationships
3Chiles ME System -- Architecture
- Designed, managed and used by Hacienda
- Developed incrementally, over past decade
- Performance indicators (?1,600) for all
government programs (1994)
- Government program evaluations (? 160) --
these are desk reviews (1996)
- Rigorous impact evaluations (?14) (2001)
- Comprehensive Spending Reviews -- desk reviews of
all programs in a functional area (2002)
4Chiles ME System -- Strengths (1)
- Graduated approach to ME
- Evaluations conducted externally, in fully
transparent process, and are highly credible
- All ME findings reported publicly and sent to
Congress
- ME system closely linked to the information
needs of Hacienda, especially for budget process
- Performance information used to set performance
targets for ministries -- these are largely met
5Chiles ME System -- Strengths (2)
- High utilization of ME findings by Hacienda in
the budget process and to impose management
improvements on ministries / agencies (see Table)
6Chiles ME System -- Challenges
- Unevenness in quality of evaluations -- due to
cost and time constraints
- Chile probably not spending enough on
evaluations
- Low utilization -- low ownership -- of
Haciendas evaluations by sector ministries
7Colombias ME System (SINERGIA) -- Architecture
- SINERGIA is managed by the Department of National
Planning (DNP), with strong support from the
Presidencia
- On-line sub-system -- SIGOB -- for monitoring and
reporting government progress vis-Ã -vis
Presidential Goals
- Ambitious agenda of impact evaluations (?15
underway)
- DNP provides technical assistance to a few
ministries/agencies to develop ME, and to
municipalities to pilot SIGOB and
performance-based budgeting
8Colombias ME System -- Strengths
- Very high utilization of SIGOB by President for
oversight of ministers and ministries -- via
performance targets -- and for accountability,
i.e. social control - Rigorous impact evaluations conducted externally,
and have high credibility
- Collaborative approach between DNP and sector
ministries/ agencies, and with municipalities
- Performance budget reports efforts to further
strengthen performance budgeting
- Efforts to engage with civil society
9Colombias ME System -- Challenges
- Too high reliance on donor funding for SINERGIA
-- low level of government funding support
- Insufficient reliance on ME information to
support national planning and budget
decision-making -- this may now be changing
- Weak coordination of ME roles / functions within
DNP and with central and sector ministries
- SIGOB data quality perceived as low
10How to Define a Government ME System as Being
Good Practice
- Can be dangerous concept -- each countrys
starting point and desired end-point are unique
- What a successful ME system is NOT
- complex set of laws, decrees, regulations
- performance indicators collected
- rigorous impact evaluations conducted
- rapid evaluations conducted
- these simply reflect the architecture of the
system or are measures of ME effort
11How to Define a Government ME System as Being
Good Practice
- Chile and Colombia have good-practice ME systems
because
- the quality of their ME work is generally
reliable, and
- in particular, the monitoring information and
evaluation findings which they produce are used
intensively
- High utilization reflects strong demand for ME,
and can be viewed as a predictor of an ME
systems sustainability
12Lessons (1)
- Lessons from Chile and Colombia are consistent
with other countries experience
- Key role of powerful champion of ME
- Opportunistic development of ME systems, via
continuous review and modification non-linear
development of the systems
- Centrally-driven, by capable ministry
- Incentives are key -- cultural change to
strengthen demand, achieve high utilization
- Avoid competing systems Planning, Finance
13Lessons (2)
- Build reliable ministry data systems
- Role of structural arrangements to ensure ME
objectivity and quality
- Long-haul effort, requiring patience
- Limitations of relying on laws, decrees,
regulations
- An ME system can be built and operated are
relatively low cost
- Chiles ME system costs 0.75m p.a.
- Colombias system costs about 2m p.a.
14Useful Resources (1)
- Chile www.dipres.cl/fr_control.html
- Colombia www.dnp.gov.co/paginas_detalle.aspx?idp
266
- Ernesto May et al. (eds.), Towards the
Institutionalization of Monitoring and Evaluation
Systems in Latin America and the Caribbean, World
Bank/IADB, 2006. http//web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/E
XTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/0,,contentMDK20893139pa
gePK146736piPK146830theSitePK258554,00.html
(Disponible en Español) - Keith Mackay, Institutionalization of Monitoring
and Evaluation Systems to Improve Public Sector
Management, Independent Evaluation Group, World
Bank, 2006. www.worldbank.org/ieg/ecd/institutiona
lizing_me.html (Disponible en Español)
15Useful Resources (2)
- Ariel Zaltsman, Experience with
Institutionalizing ME Systems in Five Latin
American Countries Argentina, Chile, Colombia,
Costa Rica and Uruguay, Independent Evaluation
Group, World Bank, 2006. www.worldbank.org/ieg/ecd
/experience_five_la.html - Fernando Rojas et al, Chile Análisis del
Programa de Evaluación del Gasto Publico, World
Bank, 2005. http//iris37.worldbank.org/domdoc/PRD
/Other/PRDDContainer.nsf/WB_ViewAttachments?ReadFo
rmID85256D2400766CC785257155005CB26B - World Bank website on Building Government ME
Systems www.worldbank.org/ieg/ecd/