A fundamental design aspect of IADP is about identifying new knowledge - generating, sharing, applying - within a framework of peer to peer learning and partnerships. The AIPD MEF plays a central role in that process. The new reporting system must be sensitive to who are the intended recipients, what are their specific needs, when they need it and ensure that the information required is then given in the most effective way. ANTARA has produced and progressively improved reporting formats in line with the needs of key stakeholders. These will need to be further developed in line with the expanded audience and new expectations of AIPD.
Beyond the immediate reporting needs within AIPD there will be interest by AusAID and other donor de-centralisation sector programs outside Indonesia. AIPD evaluation findings can engage with and contribute to structured learning in other countries.
Building M&E capacity of partners
Consistent with the intent of the Paris and Jakarta Declarations AIPD will be promoting a culture of M&E. Where required (and asked) this includes building up local capacity among partners.. The aim is to increase the capacity of stakeholders to assess, analyse and utilize performance information. It needs to be demand-driven. The Evaluability Assessment is a major part of this process.
The ANTARA team has worked closely with each implementing partner (Government or CSO) to clarify and sharpen the activity logic, identify target outcomes and establish practical indicators, baselines and targets to report against. This engagement has included M&E workshops and other training opportunities. This is good practice and should continue. All evaluations of AIPD will be jointly undertaken. This process creates a shared understanding and ownership. This will help build the M&E capacity of individuals and organisations, improve reporting and, crucially, will enable partner access to, and use of, the M&E results. By supporting the mainstreaming of M&E within each partner organisation it will add value beyond the life of AIPD.
Towards a single high-level Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
Over time AusAID is keen to see the development of a single high level monitoring and evaluation framework that will shared by all programs within the decentralisation area. This will contain a maximum of ten clear and measurable performance indicators. These “horizontal indicators” will measure the collective contribution of AusAID’s suite of sub-national programs towards the achievement of key MDG indicators. AIPD will lead the development and monitoring of this framework.
An appropriate allocation will be made from the AIPD budget towards monitoring and evaluation. This amount will be commensurate with the size of the investment overall, approximately 3- 5% of the total program budget. This will enable recruitment of full time staff (M&E Officer, Research Co-ordinator, Research Assistant/s), STA inputs (M&E Specialist), commissioning of research, survey work, and M&E training activities.
Review of the MEF
The IADP is a developing program which can be expected to change over the program life. In line with this the MEF needs to be regularly updated and developed. It is proposed that this development is undertaken each 12 months and is designed to reflect the changes in IADP emphasis as well as the further development of knowledge and focus in the MEF itself.
1 The follow-up phase to ANTARA has been renamed the Australia Indonesia Partnership for Decentralisation, to take account of the expanded geographic coverage as well as AusAID’s desire to ‘rebrand’ its support programs as various elements of an ‘Australia Indonesia Partnership’.
2 The core design team consisted of Jonathan Hampshire (Team Leader), Erman Rahman (Governance Specialist), Jessica Ludwig (PFM Specialist), Petraca Karetji (Knowledge Management Specialist), Jeff Bost (M&E Specialist) and Rob Brink (AusAID/BaKTI). Seven staff from the MOHA also joined the team at different points during the field work, as well as four staff from AusAID.
3 Local governments refer to district (kabupaten) and municipal (kota) governments.
4 Authority to collect most revenue is nevertheless still held by the central government.
5 World Development Report 2004, Making Services Work for Poor People. Washington DC, Oxford University Press for the World Bank.
6 Levy, Brian, 2007. Governance Reform. Bridging Monitoring and Action. World Bank, Washington DC, pp.1
7 Corruption challenges at sub-national level in Indonesia, Transparency International, July 2009
8 In the four targeted provinces, central government transfers represent on average 85% of combined P/LG revenues. Own revenues, largely from taxes, levies and charges, vary from between 2% of total revenue in Papua Barat to 10% in NTB.
9 Using the 2006 formula, some 50% of National DAU pool is for covering the wage bill (source: Indonesia PER 2007, The World Bank).
10 These de-concentrated and co-managed funds are released by the MOF directly to contractors or local government technical units, who must then account for the funds directly to the relevant National Government Ministry. The amounts are significant. For example, in NTB the 2009 allocation is Rp. 0.95 trillion (excluding PNPM) which equals 74% of the total Provincial budget. In the case of NTT, the 2007 allocation for de-concentration and co-managed funds amount to Rp. 0.76 trillion, which is 80% of the Provincial budget. The total community block grant funds of PNPM are only Rp. 6.9 trillion (2008) and Rp. 9.8 trillion (2009), which are relatively small in comparison to the total provincial and district budgets of Rp. 390 trillion (2008).
11 These have been carried out jointly by AusAID and the World Bank, and are known as Public Expenditure Analysis and Capacity EnHancement (PEACH). More information is available from www.worldbank.org/id
12 Kompas, 12/08/09: UANG NEGARA Rp 600 Triliun di Daerah Berbahaya
13 Minimum Service Standards (MSS) have been established for health and education that should allow for an objective and comparable measurement of services. However, many regions complain that they are too sophisticated, being more like ‘maximum service standards’. Also, the fiscal implications have not been considered by the respective line ministries, and a key question is thus ‘How will the achievement of MSS be financed’?
14 For example, in NTT province there are reported to be 1,648 ‘private’ (mostly Christian) primary schools and 2,525 public schools, while in NTB province there are some 1,379 Madrasah and 2,856 public primary schools (source, http://www.depdiknas.go.id/statistik/0607/sd_0607/index_sd_0607(baru).html)).
15 Ford Foundation: Budget Advocacy in Indonesia. Country Report: Indonesia. October 2008; International Budget Project: Lessons from the field. The Impact of Civil Society Budget Analysis and Advocacy in Six Countries. Practitioners Guide
16 For example, a Central Information Commission has recently been established (Jakarta Post, 22 July, 2009) to combat the issue of transparency, in conjunction with Indonesia’s Law No. 14/2008 on Public Information. Standard technical regulations for public information and disputes over such information will be determined by the commission, which will also look towards increased collaboration with Indonesia’s civil society.
17 Village Corruption in Indonesia: Fighting Corruption in the World Bank’s Kecamatan Development Program (KDP), Asia Foundation, 2001.
18 Papua now has one of the highest levels of per capita GDPs in Indonesia, and yet also one of the highest levels of poverty.
19 Sourced from ‘Corruption Challenges at sub-national level in Indonesia’, Transparency International Publication, 2009
20 For example, during interviews with government officers in Jayapura District, the design team was informed that a total of six government staff have recently been prosecuted for corruption.
21 Ministry of Home Affairs, The World Bank Indonesia. Indonesia: Local Government Public Financial Management Measurement Framework. Jakarta, 2005.
22 Papua is nevertheless a ‘special’ case, where under the special autonomy law, districts are responsible to the governor.
23 A World Bank report in 1998 entitled ‘Assessing Aid: What works and doesn’t work’, was a significant milestone in critiquing donor practices and proposing new aid delivery approaches and methods.
24 AusAID’s support will align with GOI policy objectives, particularly as outlined in the Chapter on Revitalisation of the Decentralisation and Regional Autonomy Process in the 2004-2009 National Medium Term Development Plan. A similar chapter is being drafted for the 2010-2014 Plan.
25 AusAID has already provided AUD 4 million to the PEACH Trust Fund of the World Bank that will be used mainly to conduct PEA and to improve local capacity in conducting PEA. AIPD will therefore need to liaise closely with the World Bank to avoid duplication of effort.
26 The AusAID funded ACCESS program had wide experience of promoting the “one village one plan” concept, as well as promoting gender and poverty inclusive planning approaches, that can be used to inform this process.
27 The DIALOG design would nevertheless need to be reviewed and refined/revised as required prior to implementation, given that it is now almost two years old.
28 These LGs are: Kota Gorontalo, Kabupatens Gorontalo and Pohuwato in Gorontalo Provinces and Kota Jayapura, Kabupatens Jayapura and Biak in Papua Provinces.
29 This may include Development Planning Board (Bappeda), Finance Management Bureau/Agency, Regional Assistant Office for Monitoring, Electronic Data Centre Office (KPDE), Local Statistical Office, Regional Library as well as technical units (e.g. Health and Education).
30 There are several programs that have focused on developing local CSO capacity in budget issues, such as Participatory Budgeting and Expenditure Tracking (PBET, executed by the National Democratic Institute with World Bank funding), Civil Society Initiatives Against Poverty (CSIAP, executed by The Asia Foundation with DFID support), and the Local Governance Support Program (LGSP, USAID-funded) .
31 These are either in addition to, or reflect/re-emphasise, the already stated ‘principles for AIPD engagement’ listed in section 3.1 of this document.
32 World Development Report 2004, Making Services Work for Poor People. Washington DC, Oxford University Press for the World Bank.
33 Levy, Brian, 2007. Governance Reform. Bridging Monitoring and Action. World Bank, Washington DC, pp.1
34 World Development Report 2004, Making Services Work for Poor People. Washington DC, Oxford University Press for the World Bank.
35 LGs refer to district (kabupaten) and municipal (kota) governments
36 Law 22/99 on regional autonomy and law 25/99 on fiscal balance
37 See “Making People’s Voices Matter: An Analytical Study on District Level Planning and Budgeting” (Bappenas and DSF: 2008) that discusses the legal framework in detail.
38 Unification of revenue, treasury, finance and asset
39 Ford Foundation: Budget Advocacy in Indonesia. Country Report: Indonesia. October 2008; International Budget Project: Lessons from the field. The Impact of Civil Society Budget Analysis
and Advocacy in Six Countries. Practitioners Guide
40 Mardiasmo, Director General for Fiscal Balance, in: Kompas http://m.kompas.com/index.php/news/read/data/2009.01.20.01310258
41 As of 22 December 2008 (Stock Taking on Indonesia’s Recent Decentralisation Reforms
Update, USAID-DRSP: 2009).
42 Kompas, 12/08/09: UANG NEGARA Rp 600 Triliun di Daerah Berbahaya
43 Equalising funds include general block grant (DAU), specific block grant (DAK) and revenue sharing (natural resources and taxes).
44 Calculation based on MKPP+, ANTARA 2009
45 NTT PEA (2009)
46 Data for Papua is obtained from draft Papua PEA update (forthcoming).
47 Ministry of Home Affairs, The World Bank Indonesia. Indonesia: LG Public Financial Management Measurement Framework. Jakarta, 2005.
48 The development returns can be high from reviewing public expenditures to identify those with high potential returns, and on-going, low-return expenditures that could be usefully re-prioritized toward high-return uses. Where this process works well, the fiscal space opened up for new investment or productive current expenditure can be large. One goal of public expenditure management reforms is to put into place systems that routinely review and recalibrate priorities
49 See discussion on budget analysis and advocacy activities by civil society on pp. 5,14
50 DIALOG selected three candidates of participating LGs based on the score of the PFM Assessment (see Activity S4.1) in each of Gorontalo and Papua Provinces. These LGs already signed a Memorandum of Understanding to participate in the program in September 2008 and are facilitated to develop a medium term strategy and investment plans to improve access to and quality of health and education services. These plans are expected to be finalized by the end of 2010. Based on the DIALOG’s Performance Agreement, successful preparation and adoption of the plans, improvement in PFM score, improvement in budget transparency and preparation processes, and improvement of spending mix in the two sectors will make the LGs eligible to access financial incentives and further capacity building and technical assistance activities. The performance of the participating districts will be further evaluated on an annual basis.
The grant (in the total amount of IDR 12-16 billion per district) for LGs in Gorontalo will be provided by the Program and provincial government, where the share of the provincial government is increased over time for three years. In Papua, the grant will utilise the special autonomy (otsus) funds, with support from the program to design and implement the performance-based incentive mechanism. In addition, supports will be provided to the PG of Papua to improve allocation formula for general grants (non performance-based) from province to district. It is envisaged that AIPD will implement this activity only in the two selected provinces from Year 1 to Year 4 in Gorontalo and from Year 2 to Year 5 in Papua due to the Governor election next year. The program’s mid-term review will decide whether the pilot to be expanded to other districts/municipalities in the two provinces and/or to also cover other AIPD provinces.
51 This may include Development Planning Board (Bappeda), Finance Management Bureau/Agency, Regional Assistant Office for Monitoring, Electronic Data Centre Office (KPDE), Local Statistical Office, Regional Library as well as technical units (e.g., Health and Education).
52 There are several programs implemented that have focus on developing local CSO capacity in budget issues, such as Participatory Budgeting and Expenditure Tracking (PBET, executive by the National Democratic Institute with World Bank funding), Civil Society Initiatives Against Poverty (CSIAP, executed by The Asia Foundation with DFID support), Local Governance Support Program (LGSP, USAID-funded) .
53 The author wishes to acknowledge input provided by Mr. Robert Brink, AusAID
54 AIPD Concept Note for Peer Review
55 Comment received from ICS Papua
56 According to KIPRA, Papua
57 Adapted from the “cyclical trust-building loop”, by Siv Vangen and Chris Huxham in their article: “Nurturing Collaborative Relations: Building Trust in Interorganisational Collaboration”. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 39 No. 1, March 2003. Pages 5-31.
58 “Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability”, R.A.W. Rhodes, Open University Press, Buckingham, Philadelphia, 1997. PP. 50 - 51
59 The initial (February 2008) and final (June 2009) MEF were given to the Design Team as an example of good practice. The SNS MEF reflects the experience of the SNS program in its first two year of operation.