Mid term review of the Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability (PEMFA) programme in Zambia
Om publikasjonen
Utgitt: | November 2007 |
Type: | Norad-innsamlede rapporter |
Utført av: | SIPU International: Finn Hedvall, Lennart Ljung, Kristin Sinclair, Göran Steen, Peter Søndergaard, Pascal Tegwa |
Bestilt av: | Norad for Government of Zambia in collaboration with PEMBA Lead Cooperating Partners (EC, Norway, DFID and WB) |
Område: | Zambia |
Tema: | Demokrati |
Antall sider: | 151 |
Serienummer: | 28/2007 |
ISBN: | 978-82-7548-266-0 |
Prosjektnummer: | ZAM-3001 |
NB! Publikasjonen er KUN tilgjengelig elektronisk og kan ikke bestilles på papir
The Project
The purpose of programme for Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability (PEMFA) for Zambia is to impact on the quality of public expenditure management. By improving capacity and strengthening financial accountability, the programme is seen as a means to achieve economic growth and poverty reduction. During a five year period (2005-09) 11 cooperating partners are supporting the programme with a budget of USD 72, 2 million, of which Norway has pledged approximately 10 per cent.
Interesting Findings
- Although many deliverables are in good progress, the programme has yet to deliver many of its final outputs and it is therefore premature to identify any substantial effects. Progress is pending on new legislation and training of the Procurement Supply Unit, among other things.
- The planned efforts pertaining to PEMFA are still regarded as relevant within the national context.
- It is difficult to determine whether the programme is cost-efficient as outputs are still being processed, but the Zambian cost is considered by the team to be on the high side compared with similar projects in other countries.
- While the programme is characterised as having a planning and monitoring framework of high quality, there is insufficient interaction between programme components and donors are seen to micro-manage the programme.
- The risks identified for the programme include poor incentives and capacity gaps.
- Several recommendations are made by the evaluation team, and the planned end result of the midterm review is an agreed action plan with a list of accepted proposals.
Se nyhetssak