Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys in Uganda (PETS)

1. Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys in Uganda (PETS) Zerubabel Ojoo Management Systems and Economic Consultants Ltd. Uganda Email:stalight@africaonline.co.ug May 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. Main Findings of the Survey • 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.

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

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