The document discusses conducting a Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS) to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural public spending in Sub-Saharan Africa. A PETS examines how funds budgeted for key agricultural programs are delivered to intended beneficiaries. It involves tracking spending through administrative levels using surveys. The methodology can range from simple to complex depending on country context. Key steps include preparatory work, sampling, data collection and analysis, and reporting findings and recommendations to improve service delivery and spending effectiveness. The timeline for a PETS is typically 5 months but may be longer for more complex surveys.

1. STRENGTHENING NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE
AGRICULTURAL PUBLIC EXPENDITURE IN SUB-SAHARAN
AFRICA
Agricultural Public Expenditure Training Workshop
Accra, Ghana
(April 13 -14, 2011)
MODULE 4
SPECIALIZED STUDIES:
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE TRACKING SURVEYS
(PETS)

2. CONTENTS
I) BACKGROUND
II) OBJECTIVE/SCOPE
III) METHODOLOGY
IV) DATA SOURCES
V) PROCESS
VI) TA TEAM
VII) TIMELINE

3. I) BACKGROUND
• A problem arises when public funds do not reach frontline service
providers, or when they do, that they are used inefficiently.
• Limited information on quality of services undermines accountability
and effective use of scarce public resources.
• A specialized study – PETS - can be conducted to complement the
Basic Agric Diagnostic analysis to assess this type of problem.
• PETS focus on outputs of public programmes.
• The template TOR for PETS (A4.1) draw on various sources
(A4.2, A4.3, for example of PETS in Uganda, see A4.4):
– Practitioner’s Toolkit for AgPERs (WB/DFID, 2010)
– Public Expenditure Management Handbook (World Bank, 1998)
– Other reports (especially “PETS-QSDS in SSA: A Stocktaking
Study”)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

4. II) OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
Objectives:
• Assist selected governments in SSA to assess whether public
resources budgeted for key agriculture sector programmes are
effectively reaching the intended programmes and beneficiaries,
and in a cost-effective manner.
• Provide evidence-based insights into service delivery problems to
high level policy and decision makers.
• Carry out a field survey to track resources through focusing on
administrative and procedural steps of budget execution.
• Pinpoint bottlenecks, inefficiencies or deviations from the intended
purposes, and to provide recommended corrective actions.
• Provide a diagnostic tool which will identify sources and extent of
inefficiency or leakage of public services, and as an analytical tool
to discover the causes of poor service delivery.
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

5. Scope:
PETS focus on examining the effectiveness of agric
expenditures with respect to the outputs of key services (see
Chart) rather than outcomes and impact.
(1) Key Activities: covers a range of activities.
(2) Survey Focus: on agric exp. where there are concerns about
inefficiencies (and/or high unit costs) in resource use (e.g.,
agric extension services) or high costs (e.g., fertilizer support).
(3) Country Selection: Various prerequisites: adequate level of
PEM; completed recent AgPER; evidence of concerns about
delivery of services of substantial expenditure items.
(4) Institutional Scope: Choice of area as focus of PETS will
determine responsible and collaborating ministry(ies)/related
agencies.
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

6. Chart - Output indicators:
Coverage and Utilization of Ag. Services
Investment /
Intervention
Outputs
Provision /
Coverage (e.g.)
Outcomes
Utilization (e.g.)
Disaggregation
Research Number of
technologies dev’d
Area under
technology
Commodity, gender, space
Extension Extension-farmer
ratio
Number of visits
received per year
Gender, space
Irrigation Capacity of irrigation
(irrigable area)
Area under irrigation Commodity, gender, space
Farm support Quantity of support Area under input Commodity, gender, space
Feeder roads Length or density of
roads
Space
Market Distance to nearest
market
Share of output sold Commodity, gender, space
Post harvest Capacity of storage Capacity utilized Commodity, gender, space
… Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

7. Relationships of I-O-O is Key for PETS
(example from Uganda AgPER/PETS analysis)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

8. III) METHODOLOGY
Overview:
• Scale and complexity of PETS will vary greatly from
country to country, based on various factors:
– Complexity of service or expenditure program
– Adequacy and reliability of data
– Time and cost required
• Difficult to propose a “standard methodology
• “Simple” vs. “Complex” survey/PETS (see Table)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

9. Simple vs. Complex PETS
Simple Survey Complex Survey
Survey Focus • Small country
• Comparatively new service or
programme
• Largely undifferentiated
population with respect to topic
• Centrally managed
• Large country
• Large-scale, long-term service
• Need for careful stratification
of sample
• Many administrative layers
• Decentralised responsibilities
Data Availability • Good M&E system in place
• Baseline undertaken
• Target and non-target
population data available
• Poor or non-existent M&E
system
• No baseline data available
• Data do not address survey
issues
Data Gathering • TA team
• Small counterpart team
• TA team
• Counterparts
• Interviewers/enumerators
Additional Costs • Small – can be accommodated
within existing budget
• Substantial costs for hiring and
mobilizing interviewers and
enumerators
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

10. Steps for a PETS
1) Preparatory Stage:
– Identify focus area (prior to engaging TA Team)
– Understand Focus area setting, involving resource flows,
role of key actors in the delivery “chain”
– Assess data availability and collection capacity
2) Sampling and Questionnaire Design: unlikely survey
instruments can be standardized
– Design sample survey: stratified random sample
– Prepare draft questionnaire: Establish key hypotheses
and tailor questionnaire to various administrative levels
(central, regional, district government; service providers)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

11. Steps for a PETS (cont.)
3) Implementation
– Identify enumerators/interviewers
– Field Test the draft questionnaire on pilot basis
– Collect Data after survey is finalized, and ensure monitoring and
supervision to ensure data reliability
– Enter and clean data to control for data errors
4) Data Analysis, Reporting and Dissemination
– Data Analysis by TA team, using graphical method
– Reporting by TA team, focusing on summary of data analysis
– Dissemination to key actors, using workshop(s), in collaboration
with MOA/agency concerned
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

12. Types of Conclusions and Recommendations
• Emerging from the analysis of survey data
• Arising beyond the scope of the PETS:
– Whether specific norms for the delivery of a service
shouldbe set, and what they might be
– The extent to which budget reallocations should be made that
would enhance effectiveness or “value for money”
– The need for improved accounting systems to enhance
transparency in budget allocations and accountability
– The need to build capacity at different levels in order to
enhance service delivery or operations
– Introduction of incentives to make the delivery system more
client-driven at all levels
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

13. IV) SOURCES OF DATA AND INFORMATION
• A PETS focuses on generating new data
• Also, a useful PETS starts with sound grasp of the
sector, Ag. PE and areas of service delivery. Key
information sources will include:
– Official sources
– Studies and “Grey” sources
– Sources for reviewing sector outputs and
outcomes
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

14. V) PROCESS
(a) Participatory Process
• Establish working partnership with key actors
• Ensure TA team has active counterparts
(b) Key Phases (3): to be carried out by the TA team, guided by Steering Group
(SG)
• Preparatory Phase
– Stakeholder Briefing
– Inception Workshop
– Setting up SG
• Implementation Phase
– Survey Implementation
– Technical Workshop
– Data Analysis
• Reporting Phase: draft diagnostic report; draft summary diagnostic report
workshop (after 4 months); Full Analytical Report (reflect relevant comments;
within 5 months of start)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

15. Implementation Process/Arrangements
– A Steering Group (SG) of key stakeholders to
provide oversight of the exercise and link to high
level decision-makers
– Timing and length of survey will depend on its
focus and extent it has seasonal characteristics
• Simple PETS: about 5 months
• Complex PETS: 9 months or longer
– TA team to carry out the PETs (with local
counterparts)
• International Expert: methodological & cross-
country expertise
• Local Expert: country/sector knowledge
– Important to engage the donor working group
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

16. VI) TA TEAM: Key Tasks and Outputs
• Help refine focus area for survey
• Desig the survey and make preparations for the survey
• Monitor and supervision of data collection
• Carry out data analysis
• Prepare a summary diagnostic report
• Prepare a full analytical report
• Design/manage inception, technical & report workshops
• Liaising with the DWG
• Identify capacity building needs
• Formulate recommendations for enhancing service delivery
and the effectiveness of targeted expenditures
• Ensure that all data utilised is assembled online
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

17. TA Team: Key Reports and Data Base
Key Reports
• Inception report: within two weeks, identifies issues & scope of
survey
• Summary diagnostic report: upon completion of the initial data
analysis, presents the main results of the survey
• Full analytical report: within one month of the completion of the
initial analysis, presents main results and recommendations
• Final report: within five months, incorporating the relevant feedback
to the results and recommendations
Database
• During the assignment, TA team, in collaboration with MoA and MoF,
will establish a database including background documents and
sources, evaluation methodology, data sampling frame and
questionnaires, survey data, working papers & analyses to be online
• This database will be used for capacity building purposes as part of a
joint learning activity
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

18. VII) TIMELINE
About 5 months (plus 3+ months for complex PETS)
Resources Required:
• TA Consultant Team (1 international + 1 local
consultant)
• MOA and/or other relevant agency to provide one
full-time counterpart or team equivalent for each
consultant
• Think tanks, universities and other local participants
will not be remunerated
• For complex PETS, additional funds may need to be
mobilized from other sources (e.g. donor working
group)
Background Objective/Scope Methdology Data Sources Process TA Team Timeline

19. KEY REFERENCES/DOCUMENTS
(See Annex 4 for selected items/excerpts)
A4.1: Template TOR for Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (June, 2010)
A4.2: Survey Tools for Assessing Performance in Service Delivery (1 page overview,
excerpt from: Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution:
Evaluation Techniques and Tools, by F. Bourguignon and L. da Silva, Editors, WB,
2008)
A4.3: PETS-QSDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Stocktaking Study, by Gauthier, World Bank,
September 2006 (excerpt)
A4.4: Uganda PETS Assessment (excerpt from Uganda, Ag. PER (Feb., 2010)
A4.5: Analyzing the Incidence of Public Spending: Overview of Key Concepts (1 page
overview, excerpt from: Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income
Distribution: Evaluation Techniques and Tools, by F. Bourguignon and L. da Silva,
Editors, WB, 2008)
Relevant Website references include: web.worldbank.org/apea and
www.worldbank.org/afr/agperprogram