Public Expenditure and Service Delivery Survey in Health 2002
Papua New Guinea
Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS)
A Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS) is a diagnostic tool used to study the flow of public funds from the center to service providers. It has successfully been applied in many countries around the world where public accounting systems function poorly or provide unreliable information. The PETS has proven to be a useful tool to identify and quantify the leakage of funds. The PETS has also served as an analytical tool for understanding the causes underlying problems, so that informed policies can be developed. Finally, PETS results have successfully been used to improve transparency and accountability by supporting "power of information" campaigns.
PETS are often combined with Quantitative Service Delivery Surveys (QSDS) in order to obtain a more complete picture of the efficiency and equity of a public allocation system, activities at the provider level, as well as various agents involved in the process of service delivery.
While most of PETS and QSDS have been conducted in the health and education sectors, a few have also covered other sectors, such as justice, Early Childhood Programs, water, agriculture, and rural roads.
In the past decade, about 40 PETS and QSDS have been implemented in about 30 countries. While a large majority of these surveys have been conducted in Africa, which currently accounts for 66 percent of the total number of studies, PETS/QSDS have been implemented in all six regions of the World Bank (East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa).
Economy of Papua New Guinea had been in a state of recession since the mid-1990s. The fiscal situation had been compromised by large deficits. Pertinent questions about how effectively social spending was translating into the actual delivery of services had been raised.
The Public Expenditure and Service Delivery Survey (PESD) was conducted in February-August 2002 to study resources flow in education and health sectors. The PESD was launched by the World Bank as part of the Bank's analytical work on poverty in Papua New Guinea, in close cooperation with the country's government and the Australian Agency for International Development.
The main focus of the project was on expenditure in education. The health facility survey was not intended to be a full service delivery survey in order to keep the field operations and costs within manageable limits. It was added as a rider to the school survey. Health facilities that could be reached within 20 minutes from the sample schools were covered. Against a sample of 214 schools, the survey covered 117 health facilities. A short instrument collected information on how often the facilities were open, the presence of staff, and the availability of key medicines.
The PESD education sector survey covered 214 schools in 19 districts across 8 provinces (out of 20), with two provinces selected in each of the four main regions.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
- Health facilities
Health Systems & Financing
Regions: Gulf, National Capital District (NCD), Enga, Eastern Highlands, West Sepik (Sandaun), Morobe, West New Britain and East New Britain.
Producers and sponsors
The World Bank
The Australian Agency for International Development
The National Department of Education, Papua New Guinea
The Department of National Planning and Rural Development, Papua New Guinea
The Australian Agency for International Development
Health facilities that could be reached within 20 minutes from the sample schools were covered. Against a sample of 214 schools, 117 health facilities were selected.
Below is the discription of how the schools sample was selected:
1) Following regions were covered: Gulf, National Capital District (NCD), Enga, Eastern Highlands, West Sepik (Sandaun), Morobe, West New Britain, East New Britain. These provinces cover a wide spectrum both in terms of poverty levels and educational development. They range from the relatively rich (NCD and Gulf with headcounts of 19 and 28%) to the poor Sandaun (headcount of over 60%), from the well-educated (NCD and East New Britain with adult literacy rates of 84 and 74%) to poorly-educated (Enga and Eastern Highlands with adult literacy rates of 26 and 38%), from those with high primary enrolment (NCD and ENB) to those with low enrolment (Enga, Gulf and Sandaun), from those with high grade 1-8 retention rates (NCD with 79%) to those with low retention rates (Eastern Highlands and Sandaun with just above 20%).
2) Three districts were randomly selected within provinces with probability proportional to the number of schools in the district. In two of the provinces, Gulf and West New Britain, that only had two districts, both were selected. Ten schools were then selected randomly within each district. In NCD, which does not have districts but is organized by wards/census enumeration areas, 30 schools were randomly selected.
3) The original sample included 220 schools. Many of the schools in the original sample could not be covered for a variety of reasons. In these cases, replacement schools (randomly selected from the same district) were used. A special effort was made to ensure coverage of remote schools. In particular, some sites were revisited later to cover schools that could not be surveyed during the first attempt due to logistical difficulties. The final sample included 214 schools.
4) The PESD schools were further classified by the level of poverty and remoteness. The level of poverty was measured by the estimated poverty rate for the LLG where the school was located, and the remoteness index was based on a composite measure of distance and travel time from the school to a range of facilities. The PESD sample of schools was well distributed across the remoteness and poverty spectrum.
Dates of Data Collection
Data Collection Mode
National Research Institute, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea
Public use file
The use of this survey must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the identification of the Primary Investigator (including country name)
- the full title of the survey and its acronym (when available), and the year(s) of implementation
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download (for datasets disseminated online).
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.