DDI_SLE_2001_PETSA_v01_M Antonina Redko 2011-10-18 NADA v01 (October 2011) Public Expenditure Tracking Survey in Agriculture 2001 PETSA 2001 SLE_2001_PETSA_v01_M Economic Policy Research Unit

World Bank

Statistics Sierra Leone Central Planning Unit, Sierra Leone NADA Department for International Development United Nations Development Programme Hooman Dabidian Cindy Audiguier 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). Agriculture & Rural Development In many countries, including Sierra Leone, increases in the allocation of central government funds towards social sector expenditures have not always corresponded with improvements in social sector outcomes. Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) have been used to explore and understand this phenomenon. PETS survey tool examines the flow of funds and materials from the central government to frontline services delivery units. In Sierra Leone, the Ministry of Finance established the PETS Task Team in 2001 to oversee the development and use of the survey. UK's Department for International Development (DFID) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) offered financial support, while the World Bank prepared the technical review and recommendations for future PETS. Unlike in other countries, PETS in Sierra Leone was entirely home-grown and was first undertaken while the country was still in conflict. Two surveys (PETS 1 and PETS 2) documenting semi-annual expenditures for 2001 were conducted in January-June and July-December 2001. Overall, the project covered following sectors: - Education, - Health, - Agriculture, - Fisheries and Marine Sector, - Security Sector (Police and Military), - Social Welfare, Gender and Children Affairs, - Rural Development and Local Government, - Provincial Water Supply and Sanitation Services. The coverage of sectors by PETS in Sierra Leone was much wider than in other countries primarily due to the need to fill the accountability gap. However, the coverage by geography and category of expenditure had been narrow. Moreover, as of May 2003, much of the collected information had not been analyzed. Documented here is the Public Expenditure Tracking Survey conducted in Sierra Leone agricultural sector. Thirty nine agricultural and livestock stations in 27 chiefdoms in Western urban and rural areas were surveyed. Sierra Leone Sample survey data [ssd] University of Sierra Leone Economic Policy Research Unit 1) Public Expenditure Tracking Survey, January - June 2001 (PETS 1) Sampling was applied to facilities and communities. Due to the absence of any list of agricultural facilities and incomplete or inaccurate lists for education, health and water facilities, 230 Enumeration Areas (EAs) (out of 1380 Census EAs) were selected by probability proportional to size from those Chiefdom/wards considered safe (unsafe areas would not have been receiving goods and services from the government anyway). All communities and facilities in each chosen EA were sampled. 2) Public Expenditure Tracking Survey, July - December 2001 (PETS 2) Sampling was again applied to facilities and communities. Due to concern that the sampling design adopted in the previous PETS did not cover an adequate number of facilities in some sectors and because facilities were found to serve communities in more than one EA, the primary sampling unit for the second PETS was redefined. The primary sampling unit became the whole of a Chiefdom/ward. The same Chiefdoms/wards were used as in the first PETS. Enumerators were instructed to interview up to five facilities of each type and up to five communities within the newly defined EAs which should include the same facilities and communities covered in the first PETS. There was no sampling plan for the additional facilities/communities which have to be regarded as non-random selections. Face-to-face [f2f] PETS 1 and PETS 2 surveys utilized an elaborate series of some 40 questionnaires, each tailored specifically to one of the eight covered sectors. For each sector, a series of three questionnaires gathered data at headquarters, regional, and district office levels. A further two questionnaires were used to collect information at the facility and community levels. The public expenditure tracking data collected consisted primarily of non-wage recurrent budget allocations, expenditures and transfers. This was collected for each budget head and sub-head, for each sector, at ministry headquarters, regional and district levels. Information on development expenditure was sought at the Ministry headquarters level. At the facility level, the survey focused primarily on general sector data such as characteristics of the facility and outputs. Public expenditure-related information collected included: regularity of staff salary payments; timing, adequacy and quality of material supply; access to ancillary government services/subsidies; fees charged; access to non-government support; and inspection and auditing activities. 1) The World Bank review team recommended that future PETS in Sierra Leone adopted a phased implementation program for PETS reducing the number of sectors covered at one time (with the initial focus on the education and health sectors) and increasing the time period between surveys of the same sector. This will allow sufficient time for a more complete analysis and reporting of the data collected. 2) PETS has to some degree been a victim of its own success. By raising awareness of accountability issues, many are calling on the PETS team to track an increasingly wide array of activities and sectors. However, it is important that PETS is viewed as a component of an overall external accountability framework, including the activities of the Anti-Corruption Commission, the Auditor General's Department, Parliament and others. PETS cannot and should not be the only tool for holding line ministries accountable for government expenditures. PETS has an important role to play in understanding where problems may be found, but accountability ultimately comes from Parliament and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). PETS 1 was carried out by eleven members and two ex-officio members from Economic Policy Research Unit (the Ministry of Finance), University of Sierra Leone, Statistics Sierra Leone and the Central Planning Unit (CPU). It was assisted by 26 supervisors and 100 enumerators from the University of Sierra Leone. PETS 2 was carried out by PETS Secretariat housed in Economic Policy Research Unit and an expanded task force of 15 members, three ex-officio members, 26 supervisors, 120 enumerators and seven observers. In many other countries, PETS is undertaken by an external organization, usually an academic institute or a non-governmental organization. While the current arrangement of having PETS undertaken by the Ministry of Finance did not prevent the report from being critical of the government, it is possible that future reports may not be so independent. The use of Parliamentarians, the Anti-Corruption Commission and representatives from the Auditor General's office as observers during the survey implementation was a good step in ensuring the independence of the survey process. It did not, however, substitute for full independence. While the enumerators were instructed to include the same facilities and communities in PETS 2 as in the first survey, the data processing system did not uniquely code each questionnaire. Consequently it was not possible to match responses without going back to the original questionnaires. Informal feedback indicated that the second sample of respondents were 'tired' and increasingly reluctant to cooperate; there was response fatigue. 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). Public use file 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.