DDI_UGA_2009_PETS_v01_M Antonina Redko 2011-10-24 NADA v01 (October 2011) Public Expenditure Tracking Survey in Water and Sanitation 2009 PETS 2009 UGA_2009_PETS_v01_M Anti-Corruption Coalition of Uganda NADA Stockholm International Water Institute 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). Water Corruption in the water sector in Uganda is still an issue that affects planning and delivery of water and sanitation services. It hurts mainly the poor, especially in rural areas. Fighting corruption means improving the chances of rural residents to access safe and clean water. It calls for concerted efforts and collaboration among all stakeholders to close loopholes used to misappropriate water and sanitation sector funds. In 2009, Anti Corruption Coalition Uganda (ACCU) with the support of Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) commissioned a Public Expenditure Tracking Survey to evaluate the flow of public resources, allocated for water and sanitation services, from the central government to local administrations and finally to end-users. The study aimed at establishing the amount of public funds lost to corruption and the stages where the losses occur. The findings of the research were planned to be integrated into issue-based advocacy campaigns to improve access to water and functionality of water sources. Researchers gathered budget information from the Ministry of Water and Environment, the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development, National Planning Authority and the Ministry of Local Government. Investigators also reviewed data from donors and non-government organizations that provide support to Uganda water sector: World Vision, Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), Netherlands Development Organization (SNV), Water Aid and UNICEF. Eight Uganda districts were covered by the survey: Bushenyi, Kabarole, Rakai, Gulu, Koboko, Kamuli, Soroti and Mukono. In these districts, 40 officials dealing with water and sanitation services were interviewed and 64 water facilities were visited. Focus groups were conducted with most of 983 water users who participated in the survey. Uganda Districts: Bushenyi, Kabarole, Rakai, Gulu, Koboko, Kamuli, Soroti and Mukono - Ministries, - Non-government Organizations, - District Headquarters, - District Water Offices, - Sub-county Headquarters, - Villages, - Water Points, - Residents. Sample survey data [ssd] Multitech Management Consultants Ltd The selection of the sample was carried out at three levels: central, district and local. At the central level, ministries were purposively selected based on their role and contribution to the planning and provision of water and sanitation services. The institutions included were: Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE), Directorate of Water Development (DWD), Ministry of Local Government (MoLG) and Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED). Non-government organizations consulted were also selected based on their contribution to development and provision of water and sanitation services. The following organizations were included: Netherlands Development Organization (SNV), Water Aid, World Vision, UNICEF and Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA). The selection of districts was based on regional representation and performance in terms of water coverage. Bushenyi, Rakai, Kabarole, Mukono, Koboko, Gulu, Kamuli and Soroti districts were chosen. Respondents at the district offices were instrumental in identifying sub-counties and communities to visit. A total of 40 heads of departments including Chief Administrative Officers were taken as key informants from the districts. At the district level, two sub-counties were randomly selected from the available list of sub-counties for each of the districts. The water departments' performance and quarterly reports were used as a guide for the selection. An inventory of the water points that were constructed in the fiscal year 2006-2007 was used to identify water points to visit in the selected sub-counties. At least eight facilities were visited in every district. Special emphasis was given to the following criteria: - One water facility funded by the Government of Uganda under Poverty Action Fund (PAF) or Local Government Development Programme (LGDP), - One facility funded by the private sector NGOs or special government project, - One facility that had adhered to good planning, procurement, implementation and management practices, - One facility that did not follow best practice during implementation. Water users located within a kilometer from a water source and residents found at water points were interviewed on the water and sanitation issues in their area. A total of 983 water users had their views and opinions taken, mainly through Focus Group Discussions. Sixty four focus groups were carried out with an average of 12-15 people in each group. These were mainly people found at the water point at the time of spot check for facilities that were functional. For non-functional facilities, people within a kilometer from the facility were taken as participants in the focus groups. For the facilities that had water user committees, 130 members of the committees were interviewed. Face-to-face [f2f] 1) At the central level, consultations with respondents were aimed at identifying the guidelines and flow of funding for water and sanitation sector. The interviews examined budgeting and planning processes at the center and how these processes affected delivery of water and sanitation services at the local level. The visits were also used to establish the roles of the key stakeholders at the center and how their job ensures efficient water and sanitation services delivery. 2) At the district level, heads of Departments of Water, Finance, Planning and Procurement were taken as key informants on issues relating to planning, provision and accountability for water and sanitation sector funds, and procurement and management of contracts. Specifically, the study team concentrated on the following issues: - Planning and budgeting for water and sanitation, - Flow of expenditure and utilization of water and sanitation, - Linkages between planning, budgeting and expenditure on water and sanitation resources with value for money - Degree of participation of the community in planning, management and sustainability of water and sanitation services - Governance, procurement and accountability audits for water and sanitation sector funds. 3) At the community level, water user committees and care takers were essential in guiding researchers on issues relevant for a particular water facility. The study team focused on the following issues: - Functionality of the water facilities and the water user committees, - Value for money of the water sector investments, - Usability of the facilities, - User complaints. 1) Process Consultative Model was used as the overall approach to conducting the research. The consultant used both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods to identify capacity, accountability and flow that affected delivery of water and sanitation services. Budget reviews, interviews and focus groups discussions were used as modes of data collection. A number of documents were reviewed to obtain secondary information on planning and delivery of water and sanitation services. The key ones included: the Water Sector Performance Report 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, the Water Sector Reform Study, Procurement Guidelines for Water and Sanitation Projects, NIS Report 2008, Local Government Financial and Accounting Regulations and the Local Government Act (1997) as amended. To aid the analysis, the following documents were retrieved and reviewed: - Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development monthly releases, - Bank statements from the grant collection accounts, - Cashbooks for grant collection accounts and other departments, - Release notices and receipts, - Newspaper notices on fund releases to District Local Governments. 2) The subject of the survey was sensitive and the study team had to deal with lack of free flow of information, especially at the district level. Many government officials questioned the role of Anti-Corruption Coalition of Uganda, the study's primary investigator, in matters that traditionally are reserved for the Auditor General and the Inspector of Government (IGG). Some officials were worried that the information given could be used to implicate them in malpractices in the planning and procurement of water projects. The Chief Administrative Officers however prevailed over the heads of departments to avail information to the research team. 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.