Ministry of Planning and Budget. Medium Term Sector Strategy (MTSS) Guide

Transcription

1 Ministry of Planning and Budget Medium Term Sector Strategy (MTSS) Guide Kano State Government

2 Contents 1.0 Introduction Aim of this Guide a Consistent Approach A Learning Exercise Definitions Policy, Strategy, and the Results Chain What is a Sector and what is an MDA? A Shift towards Programme-Based Budgeting MTSS What, Why and Who What is MTSS and Why Do We Need One? Who is Responsible What needs to be done to produce a Good MTSS? The Hierarchy of Planning The Current Situation in Kano State MTSS and Deepening Sectoral Frameworks Policy Making in Kano State? Try Following These Steps STAGE 1: Review and Preparation STEP 1A: Set up an MTSS Committee and Agree ToR STEP 1B: Review Existing Policy Statements STEP 1C: Gather Data, Analysis and Performance Reviews STEP 1D: Obtain Revenue Projection Information STEP 1E: Existing Contract and Budget Commitments STAGE 2: Developing Strategy STEP 2A: Commence Strategy Sessions STEP 2B: Develop Strategy for the Achievement of Outcomes STEP 2C: Activities Costs, Ceilings, and the Budget Structure STEP 2D: Policy Group Review of the Need for Changes STAGE 3: Documentation and Agreement STEP 3A: Political Approval and Understanding STEP 3B: Produce an MTSS Document STEP 3C: Presenting the Budget Other Critical Considerations Monitoring Performance Public Involvement An Outline Timeline Annexes Annex 1: Strategic and Corporate Planning and Performance Management Linkages 36 Annex 2 Glossary of Terms Annex 3: Draft Outline Terms of Reference for Sector MTSS Committee Annex 4 How BC, Policy and Planning, Log frame and M&E Terminologies fit together.. 41 Annex 5: Checklist for G&SI in MTSS and Planning Annex 6: Outline Table of Contents for MTSS Guide Annex 7: Some Pointers on Developing Sector Strategy Annex 8: Log frame Template Annex 9: Outline Means of Improving Public involvement in the MTSS Process Annex 10: Justifying Priority Options

3 1.0 Introduction The preparation of Medium Term Sector Strategies (MTSSs) is part of a larger policy, strategy and corporate planning process in Kano State. The State Government has prepared a longer-term policy document, the Kano State Roadmap for Development (KSRD). The implementation of the KSRD requires the preparation medium term sector strategies that connect the KSRD with annual budgets. Furthermore, appropriate Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) mechanisms are being prepared to ensure effective performance management and achievement of set targets. As a separate but related process, a robust corporate planning process will ensure that implementing and supporting agencies are fit for purpose, i.e. they are structured and organised in the most efficient and effective way to deliver the MTSS. The diagram in Annex 1 seeks to capture the broad linkages and interrelationships between strategic planning, corporate planning and performance management. The State Government intends to move forward in 2011 with further improvements in medium term sector strategy development (MTSS). The aim is to improve the connection between policy making, planning and medium-term budgeting, especially so as to facilitate better implementation of the State Government s policies as contained in the Kano State Roadmap for Development (KSRD) and Vision 20: All Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) in the State Government will be invited to follow the steps in this guide in developing their annual budget proposals henceforth. The Ministry of Planning and Budget (MoPB) understands that in order to do this effectively most Ministries and MDAs will require technical advice and support. This guide is intended to provide that support. However, a support team will be established within MoPB to provide technical assistance. The MTSS process is being rolled out in phases. Therefore the affected sectors are required to prepare and submit MTSSs this year, and these must be used to underpin and justify the subsequent budget submission. 1.1 Aim of this Guide a Consistent Approach The current document is intended as a guide to the MTSS process being planned. It sets out steps to be followed by all participating line Ministries and MDAs with the aim of: ensuring an appropriate degree of consistency between the submissions from different Ministries; yet allowing an appropriate degree of flexibility to reflect between-sector differences and to allow for learning and development through the process. The guide draws from Federal Government guidelines and from other states experiences in developing approaches to MTSS, but is also refined in order to take account of specific circumstances and needs in Kano State. It is expected that lessons from each annual cycle of MTSS preparation (together with experiences from other States) will lead to annual refinements to and improvements in this guide. 3

4 Above all the guide seeks to set out a series of steps that a sector Ministry should take in developing its sector strategy. The steps are not intended to be exhaustive. Each Ministry might choose to add additional steps to the process if they see fit. The structure of the guide is set out in the table of contents. There are also ten annexes providing supporting templates, additional guidance on some of the steps, and outline table of contents for an MTSS document. 1.2 A Learning Exercise MTSS approaches to planning and budgeting are still relatively new to the State. We recognise building knowledge and experience in sector strategy making is as much of a learning process for the central ministries as it is expected to be for the sector ministries and MDAs. Support for this learning will also be provided by the DFID Programmes currently working with us, namely SPARC through this Ministry, ESSPIN with the Ministry of Education, and PATHS2 with the Ministry of Health. This Ministry will provide support to the other Ministries and MDAs working on MTSS development to support their budgets. 2.0 Definitions In order for the process of doing Medium Term Sector Strategies to make sense, we need to arm ourselves with some basic common understandings. This includes some definitions on policy, strategy and objectives-terminology, and on what is a sector, a programme, and a project or activity. Some of these definitions may vary from what you have heard before or are used to. Different sectors have in the past used rather different terms for what are essentially the same processes. Annex 2 to this guide constitutes a glossary of terms for quick reference. 2.1 Policy, Strategy, and the Results Chain In very simple terms, Policy is about defining expected overarching Goals and Outcomes, whereas Strategy is about how we may achieve them. Generally we achieve Outcomes through Activities which combine to make Inputs and which deliver Outputs. Goals. A goal exists at the level of the parent organisation, in this case for the Government as a whole or quite possibly covering the whole state. It describes a key result over a long time frame towards which all combined efforts should be aiming. An example could be, a healthy and well educated population contributing to improvements in the economy and the quality of the lives of people. Outcome. Outcomes are a little more specific. For example, achieving a higher proportion of secondary aged school leavers with a level of qualification required for entry to university might be an Outcome. Similarly, fewer people suffering from diseases is an Outcome, and both of these examples may be expected to contribute to the high level policy goal mentioned above. Indeed they must do so. If they do not then the question must be raised, how can we justify trying to achieve this outcome? 4

5 The Outcome of more highly qualified school leavers may in turn be expected to result from a better education system, and building that system will have needed things schools, books, desks and people qualified teachers, assistants and administrators to teach the children and to run the system. Similarly, reducing disease incidence may need things, such as vaccines, needles and health centres, but the outcome of people being free from that disease will also have come from doctors, nurses and other staff who have carried out the vaccinations. Outputs. More teachers, nurses, vaccines, buildings and equipment are results that we call Outputs. But they are not outcomes. This is an important distinction because it is possible that our strategy (which is the combination of the inputs and activities that will result in the achievement of those outputs) might not actually achieve the Outcome we expected. In monitoring and evaluation we need to check that the output is also achieving the Outcome. If it is not then we need to modify our strategy (the combination of inputs and activities). Inputs: These are what are needed to create outputs. If a road is an output, it needs the inputs of labour, planning, materials and equipment to build it. Activities: And finally activities are the things that have to be done in order to bring inputs together to make outputs. (In some contexts these are sometimes referred to as projects.) Perhaps this may include the development of a database, building schools, recruiting staff, providing training, and procuring equipment. There are a number of other terms which you may have come across and are used to using, but in the interest of achieving a degree of simplicity we recommend that these terms are dropped from the MTSS development process. This may include terms like Aim, Objective, Target, Project and Milestone. Our definition tells us what policy-makers ought to be working towards, and that is a description of medium to long-term outcomes. Strategy makers, in order to make their work effective, need to be guided by these policy statements. They then need to work out the most effective mixture of inputs and outputs that will achieve the desired outcome result and to do that within the resource constraints they face. This discussion is summarised in Figure 1, which is called the results chain. Note that MTSS takes us as far as Outcomes. But in order to develop strategy we also need to know what the State s Longer Term or High Level Policy Goals are. Figure 1: The Results Chain Medium Term Sector Strategy Long Term Strategic Plan Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts Ongoing Ongoing Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term Medium-Term Objectives Longer-Term Goals 5

6 As shown in Figure 2 below, what is an output at one level might become an input at the next level up. For example, an output from the Education Resources Centre of a better examinations procedure could be an input to the basic education sector, contributing to more and better educated children emerging from the basic sector. Constructing related results chains like this between Ministries and sub-departments constitute some of the building blocks of the planning system. Figure 2: Connecting Results Chains Medium Term Sector Strategy Long Term Strategic Plan Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts Ongoing Ongoing Short-Term Medium Term Medium-Term Long Long-Term Term Sector Strategy Strategic Plan Medium-Term Objectives Longer-Term Goals Medium Term Long Term Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts Ongoing Ongoing Sector Short-Term Strategy Medium-Term Strategic Plan Long-Term Medium-Term Inputs Activities Outputs Objectives Outcomes Impacts Ongoing Ongoing Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term Longer-Term Goals Medium-Term Objectives Longer-Term Goals 2.2 What is a Sector and what is an MDA? We actually need to commence this definition by looking higher up the policy sequence. At the top we may talk about high level national or state-wide policy goals. Perhaps there might be four or five of these, covering areas such as growth, governance, services and the environment. A sector is an area of Government Business that will provide a direct contribution to the achievement of one or more high level policy goals. For example the sectors of Health, Education and Water would presumably feed into services. But they would also make contributions to the achievement of a goal in the area of growth. The roads sector and the power sector will make contributions to growth, but could also if managed properly contribute to environmental improvements. The business sector will also be critical to growth, but so will social development. Different states might define different sectors in this way, perhaps anything between 15 and 25 of them. Kano State has sixteen sectors, namely: 1. Economic Growth & Sustainable Development 2. Agriculture & Natural Resources 3. Education 4. Health 5. Employment & Public Sector Management 6. Youth Development 7. Gender & People with special need 8. Public Mass Transportation 9. Public Infrastructure 10. ICT 11. Security & Emergency Services 6

7 12. Societal Re-orientation 13. Environmental Protection and Sustainability 14. Rural & Community Development 15. Water Resources 16. Justice But a sector is not necessarily the same thing as a vote head or a Ministry. For example in some states there are technical schools that fall under the Ministry of Science and Technology while others fall under Education. Therefore the Education sector is contributed to by two different Ministries. Similarly under the Justice sector there might be the Ministry of Justice, but also the State High Court and the State Court of Appeal, and perhaps the Sharia Court, all of which for accountability purposes are separate vote-holding agencies or Ministries. There are also Ministries, like Finance, the SSG s Office or the Head of Service Office, that provide central services to the line Ministries. It is likely therefore that each state will have a somewhat larger number of main vote-head Ministries (you can include independent agencies here like the High Court that do not fall under a specific Ministry) than it does sectors. Of course beneath or within vote heads and Ministries there are then a series of subvote holders. These are often referred to as MDAs (or Ministries, Departments and Agencies). This structure relates to the chart of accounts, which describe the administrative structure of the government. In the accounts structure most Ministries constitute a main vote head (say for example the Ministry of Education may have the vote head code of 3300). There will then be a series of MDAs or sub-vote heads within that, such as SUBEB (which might be 3308) or the Scholarships Board (perhaps 3304).In the accounts terminology these are the Functional accounts headings. We have now established a definitional hierarchy, starting at high level policy goal and passing down through sectors, main vote heads (which include Ministries) and sub-vote heads (functional headings). From this it may be seen that a sector strategy may cover a number of MDAs, and while for many of the key sectors it will probably involve only one Ministry or main vote head, it could cover more than this. 2.3 A Shift towards Programme-Based Budgeting Until now the majority of budget preparation work has been carried out purely from the perspective of the structure of the accounts codes. As all staff in the service know, each MDA will prepare allocations under the headings of Personnel, Overheads, and Capital Expenditure. Under Personnel and Overheads, allocations are distributed under economic codes. Under capital expenditure the corresponding codes describe projects. This approach however defines expenditure in the form of inputs (especially as these apply to Personnel and Overheads), which means that they do not correspond to the outputs and outcomes, which we want to define as the objectives of our work in Government. We cannot therefore say (according to the current budgetary description) that a particular input of some kind of human effort is directed towards the achievement of a particular output. This in turn means that it is hard to ensure (through internal management) that resources are being applied in an effective way. It also means that it is hard for people outside government the citizens to whom Government is meant to be accountable to track how public money is being used. This is because it is not possible to make a connection between the budgeted pattern 7

8 of inputs expenditure and the results that are observable in the form of structures, materials, services and the other things that constitute public goods. For these reasons it is critical, if we want to achieve improved governance, to shift towards budgeting against outputs rather than budgeting against inputs. Earlier we defined an output as the tangible result of inputs and activities, but which is distinguishable from outcomes. A programme is not synonymous with an output, but it must be constituted of an output or outputs, and it will result from a variety of inputs and activities. So for example we might define a schools building programme with inputs and activities that include personnel inputs, inputs from overheads, and capital projects or contracts. In other words a programme will commonly include inputs from all three of the major current divisions in the budget or accounts codes structure (personnel, overheads and capital). This requires that as we develop strategy for a sector, we must also define programmes. This is not actually a very great challenge, as developing strategy to achieve outcomes will naturally imply a series of programmes. However, it does also mean that an additional set of budget codes must be developed so that inputs in the budget structure may be matched up with their contribution to particular programmes. In fact, matching up these codes is not as difficult as it may seem either. Figure 3 illustrates how the rising hierarchy from programmes, up to sectors and eventually to high level policy goals provides a means of demonstrating how, and ensuring that, the things we do all contribute to a common end. Inputs and activities, aimed at achieving programme outputs, which contribute to the achievement of sector outcomes, all funnel in to the progression of policy goals. And the arrows that demonstrate cross linkages illustrate how some programmes and some sectors have multiple positive impacts. Figure 3: Policy Goals Drive Sectors and Programmes Overall Policy Framework Policy Goal Growth Policy Goal Services Policy Goal Environment Policy Goal Governance Sector Environment Sector Water Sector Health Sector Education Sector Power Sector Social Inclusion Sector Justice 8

9 Various Projects and Programmes 3.0 MTSS What, Why and Who 3.1 What is MTSS and Why Do We Need One? Having defined some of the key terms sector and strategy the definition of MTSS follows. It is a strategy for a sector that should allow it to deliver outputs that will contribute to cross-government outcomes, and it describes this strategy in the medium-term probably three years and within the limitations of resource constraints so that it is realistic. A Medium Term Sector Strategy is required to describe everything that a sector Ministry, such as Health, Education or Agriculture intends to do (inputs and activities) over a medium term period (assume three years). This must be done in a way that clearly demonstrates how outputs will all contribute in the most effective and efficient way possible to the successful achievement of responsive, evidence-based outcome targets (policy statements). It should therefore describe programmes which show how inputs and activities are directed at the production of outputs. It must also be possible to demonstrate that this description of inputs and outputs can actually be implemented. This means at the very least that there must be reasonable expectations that enough money and capacity will be available to allow for the inputs and activities to be provided and carried out. Although the MTSS is a medium-term strategic planning document, it also forms the basis for describing a vote-head s annual budget, and the basis for the operation or work-plans of individual MDAs (and within these departments) in the sector. The MTSS is a living document that needs to be revised annually in the light of changes to the medium term expenditure framework (MTEF that is in the light of changes in estimates about the amount of money that is available), and in the light of experience revealed by annual performance reviews. It represents a rolling multi-year horizon for planning, and is integral to, and must be consistent with, the MTEF multiyear financial horizon. (See the glossary for a definition of MTEF.) By being medium-term the MTSS allows for two major additional improvements over current annual planning. These are: The recurrent implications of capital investments may be recognised so for example if in one year 10 new schools are built, the costs of providing teachers and buildings maintenance in subsequent years may also be provided for; and Capital programmes which may extend over more than one year can have their costs allocated across the years that it is expected to take for their implementation to be completed. Figure 4 below serves to illustrate the position of MTSS within the broader process of government policy making, planning and implementation. The figure illustrates the critical relationship with overarching policy goals and with the fiscal revenue projection process. The main conditions of this part of the process are that: 9

10 The fiscal projection provides a realistic estimate of the financial resources available over the period; and Policy goals should then be used by the Executive Council to guide the sharing of these resources in outline envelopes across the sectors, vote-heads and MDAs. The MTSS shows how the resources in the envelope are to be used, and this then provides a basis for the annual budget. Operational plans ensure that budget resources may be used effectively to manage the activities that were planned for, and annual reviews then examine the extent to which the plans proved implementable and whether they achieved the outputs and outcomes that were expected. Lessons from these reviews are fed back into the policy and strategymaking processes. Figure 4: MTSS in the Context of Key Government Processes Over-arching Policy Direction Realistic Fiscal Projections Decisions About Medium Term Sector Envelopes Medium Term Strategies in Sectors Translation of the costed Strategy into annual budgets Cash Releases, Budget Implementation and Review It is essential to be aware that in order for the MTSS process to work, it must be seen as part of this broader process. For example, if we are not making realistic fiscal projections and managing our budgets within these, then the MTSSs we produce cannot work. This is because if we inflate budgets to levels that cannot be financed there can never be enough resources available to implement plans. Similarly if there are no proper policy guidelines, it will be difficult to make sensible divisions of resources between the sectors and programmes. Equally, if there is no MTSS we cannot be confident that the details about what each sector aims to do to help achieve policies have been worked out and therefore that the money allocated will be used effectively. 10

11 3.2 Who is Responsible Being clear about these responsibilities is important. Making policy is the responsibility of our politicians those elected by the people to represent them. Civil servants are responsible for providing good information and technical advice to politicians so that they may make informed decisions about policy. Civil servants may provide advice on strategic options within the confines of resource limitations so they may say to politicians something like, during the next three years you may expect to achieve either this result, or you may expect to achieve that result, but with the resources available it is not realistic to expect to achieve them both. Figure 5 illustrates how this sequence of interconnected processes fit together as an annual cycle. The diagram represents a year (with rough monthly dates depicted along the top). Figure 5 MTSS and the Medium Term Expenditure Cycle Ideal Note 1: This depicts an IDEAL SITUATION that most States will be working towards. (Perhaps the diagram shows what we might ideally be doing in five to ten years time.) Work is underway to try to establish some of these practices in parts of the State Government. 11

12 Note 2: The dotted lines across Figure 5 are meant to show divisions of responsibilities, with the Executive Council, Honourable Commissioners and the House of Assembly at the top, Central Ministries including MoPB and MoF in the middle, and Sector Line Ministries and MDAs at the bottom. 3.3 What needs to be done to produce a Good MTSS? The large box in Figure 5 above contains a rough list of things that need to be considered when developing an MTSS in a sector. Below is a somewhat elaborated version of this list containing the things that need to be done in order to achieve a good MTSS. Note that we are talking here about ideal or good practice. Many of the conditions that would allow your MDA to complete all of these are not in place at the moment, so a critical question is, how do we start? But we cannot even answer that question until we have an idea about the things we would like to be able to do, so that is why we need to start with this list. Note also that this list is in a roughly logical order, but it is not meant to be a list that describes steps in the process. We tackle that challenge later on in section 5. So we have used bullet points here rather than numbers. Conduct annual performance review, including customer views based on public monitoring; Obtain or receive outline multi-year budget envelope projections via the Ministry of Planning and Budget, based on policy priorities and macro-economic framework projections; Review State and National/International Policies and decide upon necessary changes to sector outcome policy targets; Develop baseline information and conduct operational research, and draw upon this information in the development of strategy options involve the public in this stage; Develop strategies that meet the sector s key priorities; Check that they involve collaboration with other partners, such as federal and local governments, and the private sector (more generally civil society) and check for potential regulatory and legislative changes as key elements of strategy; Check for cross-sector implications of strategy options for example the implications of water sector strategy for the achievement of health outcomes; Develop programme descriptions of inputs and activities, including all standing requirements such as personnel, administration, supporting overheads, and outstanding (existing) contract commitments; Compile outline capital and recurrent cost projections for the entire sector strategy and programmes, and iterate to achieve projections that fit the multi-year budget envelope projections; Examine the technical feasibility of proposed strategy options and revise if necessary; Examine organisational capacity requirements necessary to implement programmes, and iterate proposals until they are reduced to a level that can be implemented with current capacity; Use the resulting costed description of programmes (things and people) as a basis for the annual budget submission; and Ensure that Monitoring and Evaluation processes are fully integrated into the MTSS process, both for providing information on performance of the sector, on identifying key indicators for the planned outputs and outcomes and for the 12

13 purpose of carrying out an annual performance review at the end of the annual cycle to inform the next round / year of the MTSS process. The role of M&E in MTSS should ideally be already part of an wider M&E framework for the Sector. Ensure the M&E framework involves both internal (government) and external (public) involvement, to check that the implementation of the strategy achieves the envisaged outputs. Ensure that Gender and Social Inclusion issues are adequately taken on board at all stages in the preparation of the MTSS. This involves, among other considerations, generating and collecting disaggregated data that reveals differential access to services and participation by women and other socially disadvantages groups; undertaking sector situation analyses that capture the position, experiences, participation and perceptions of women and other disadvantaged groups; designing programmes, projects and initiatives that take into account the views and experiences of socially disadvantaged groups as beneficiaries; and creating space for the voices of women and other socially disadvantaged groups in the process of Monitoring and Evaluating the impact of development interventions In Section 5 we provide some guidance about how to approach these tasks in structured and sequenced process. 3.4 The Hierarchy of Planning The sections above underscore the importance of locating the MTSS within the context of other State Government planning, implementation and monitoring processes. But what should its relationship be with other documents? For example, some sectors have already developed their own Sector Development Plan. Do they need to abandon these in favour of an MTSS, or does the Development Plan also have a role? Development Plans are generally longer term than the three years we expect to be covered by an MTSS. They are statements of policy and strategy which explain how longer term service improvement outcomes are to be achieved. But while they may contain some general costing of initiatives they do not generally attempt to demonstrate complete financial viability of the proposals. They often contain accepted funding gaps, for example, which it is hoped may be filled from as yet un-determined sources. Their strength is that they provide a strong context for more detailed mediumterm planning. By contrast it is expected that the MTSSs will be completely costed. They should set out definite projects and programmes for implementation over three years, and the sources of finance and capacity to implement them should be specified. There is no room for any substantial funding gap in an MTSS. It is reasonable to be quite confident about the revenue ceilings within which these plans must be made over a three year period, whereas beyond this the task of forecasting becomes increasingly hazardous. However, an MTSS is not an annual budget, and need not be specified to the same level of detail as a budget. Nor does it need to go to the level of detail contained in an operational plan. An operational plan is normally a one year plan which identifies particular activities under an annual budget, and specifically sets out departmental responsibilities for carrying out the work. It may also be broken down into quarters, and could also provide a basis for cash-flow projections. It is a predictable flow of cash against such a plan that is amongst other things required in order effectively to implement the annual budget. However, an operational plan for one year can provide a 13

14 considerable amount of information about what is entailed in implementing certain kinds of projects or programmes, and this can be very useful in helping to compile the details of the MTSS. Figure 6 below sets out the likely relationship between these different documents. The hierarchy is not intended to depict a perfect objective, but it does show the relationship between different documents at different levels. The critical thing is that they should all relate to each-other. There is no point in having (for example) a budget which includes a completely different set of provisions that bear no apparent relation to what is contained in the MTSS. A guiding principle therefore is that each of the documents should speak to each-other. That is to say that there should be few inconsistencies between them an MTSS should be guided by the development plan, and a cash-flow projection should show how an operational plan can be affected. 14

15 Figure 6: Different Plans Should Talk to Each Other Long and Medium Term Policy Documents Vision 20:2020 and KSRD Outlines overall State Policy Outcomes Loosely costed if possible to demonstrate general realism Sector Development Plan 5 to 10 years Links policy to strategy, generally costed but may include funding gaps MTSS 3 years No funding gaps Consistent with the Sector Plan, all activities costed within projected ceilings Annual Budget Based on the first year of the most recent rolling MTSS Annual Operational & Depart l Work Plans Defines responsibilities for implementation in relation to the budget Departmental Cash Flow Projections Quarterly projections of cash requirements against all planned activities The diagram in Annex 4 shows how Budget Classification, Policy and Planning, Log frame and M&E Terminologies fit together. 15

16 4.0 The Current Situation in Kano State 4.1 MTSS and Deepening Sectoral Frameworks This guide is intended to support the development of MTSS in all sectors and MDAs across State Government. However, the MoPB is only able to support efforts at MTSS in some sectors in 2011 (in order to support the 2012 to 2014 expenditure projections, and the submissions to the 2012 budget process). The other sectors and MDAs will be supported by MoPB to do what they can to develop strategies following these guidelines through deepening the sector frameworks that were developed in April/May It is advisable to improve medium term planning in this way for a number of reasons: There is a great deal to be learned through the MTSS process is and it would be wise to avoid making too many mistakes in rolling the approach out all at once; There are many technical and human challenges to implementing this new approach, including adoption of different kinds of work practice we believe it is sensible to experiment with these in a small number of sectors at first. If they are successful and lead to an improvement in implementation that can be illustrated, then other sectors, ministries and MDAs may be more willing to pick up the approach themselves. The capacity of the MoPB to provide support is limited. While the Education and Health sectors may receive support from ESSPIN and PATHS2, the MoPB will be responsible alone for supporting the other sectors. However, it would not be right for the MoPB to tell other Ministries that they may not make efforts at sector strategy making on their own initiative. On the basis of the current guide, and quite possibly through consultations with the two pilot ministries to see what they are doing, other Ministries and MDAs are encouraged to draw upon the guide when deepening their sector frameworks in Policy Making in Kano State? It is evident from the above that in order to make good strategy, we need to have good policy direction. As stated in the introduction, we are learning about strategy making in Kano State, and it is reasonable to admit that the same is true about making policy. We do not yet have fully thought through outcome-driven policies in all the areas of government responsibility, and at the outset it needs to be acknowledged that this places a limitation on the quality of the strategies we can make. In an attempt to ensure appropriate focus and build on the experience of the first tenure, the State Government tried to create the most feasible way of applying the limited available resources across the enormous range of competing needs. These efforts led to the development of various documents including the 4-year Rolling Plan, KSEEDS, Kano Roadmap for Economic Development and other strategic plan documents at various sectors such as Health, Education and Agriculture. These various policy documents provided background for the articulation of our flagship document, Kano Roadmap for Economic Development (KSRD). Therefore one of the 16

17 many challenges before the KSRD is to harmonize these plans into a single but all inclusive document that provide a strategic focus. The document is expected to give clarity across the full portfolio of Kano State Government programmes and projects. In seeking to achieve the above objective, a series of workshops and meetings were held with members of twelve sub-sectoral committees. In the process, the four High Level Goals (HLGs) were identified, namely: Sustainable Economic Growth 2. Quality Public Services 3. Environmental Protection and Sustainability 4. Value Driven Governance The first High Level Goal is paramount and is essentially the current Roadmap for Economic Development (the growth agenda). The second covers the development of a stronger government and public service; the third aims to raise the standard of life for the people of Kano and the last looks to the people s responsibilities to the land, water air, soil and animals that they all depend upon. The current draft of KSRD attempts to take a radical departure from the old practice of having too many stand-alone projects, which may not provide the required impact for socio-economic transformation of the state. Therefore, the document is now prepared based on programmes that cut across various sectors around the four High Level Goals. Under this arrangement, some programmes would have to be implemented by more than one organization. Another important aspect of KSRD is the 10-year life span consistent with NV20: 2020, to build a mechanism for continuity that would ensure that this policy document outlives the current administration. The idea is to put into practice long-term development plan acceptable to all people of Kano State irrespective of their sociopolitical background. Thus, the development plan will extend beyond the tenure of the current administration. In fact, it is one of the legacies to be bequeathed to any incoming administration for sustainable development of the state. Equally important is the preparation or development of strategies that would transform the policy aspirations into reality. As a complement to the KSRD, the idea of threeyear development plans was introduced. Medium Term Sector Strategy (MTSS) is a development plan strategy that provides greater opportunity to strengthen the impact of the on-going reforms on public financial management and budget preparation process in Kano State. Furthermore, the need to employ this planning tool became obvious with the present adoption of KSRD as the planning tool in the State. Beside the draft fiscal responsibility law of Kano State requires that an MTSS and Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) as integral provision of the law must in place is subsequent development plans in the State. In 2009, Kano State decided that the development of MTSS should commence with the women, youth and people with special needs empowerment programme. This is for the simple reason that of all the focal areas for Kano Roadmap for Economic Development, only women and youth issues are yet to have an articulated strategy for intervention even though the sector has over a billion naira budget provision in the 2009 budget of the State. Consultation was undertaken with senior public officers in relevant MDAs to gauge their opinion on the concept and sustainability of the strategy for timely, efficient and quality service delivery. A forum was also organised to review performance of both

18 public and civil societies as youth and women socio-economic empowerment programmes in the State. This provided opportunity where by different perceptions and experiences were shared among the participants, challenges identified and several options offered to mitigate obstacles working against successful execution of empowerment programmes. In order to prepare the civil servant including civil society organisation and other stakeholders to the challenges of developing MTSS, capacity building training has been organised across all the 16-sectors identified. Active Public participation is therefore planned through involvement of serious people that would uphold and deepen the continuity of the fundamental premises of the KSRD four High Level Goals. We recognize that a new administration will make changes but may still accept the fundamental premises for sustainable development of Kano State of the future. 18

19 5.0 Try Following These Steps In Section 3.3 we provided a list of basic things that need to be done in order to develop a reasonable MTSS. However, this list did not aim to set out a series of steps in a process that will help people to organise and plan the work that needs to be done. This section outlines twelve STEPS to be followed in developing an MTSS, and guides you through each step. Figure 7 below provides a diagrammatic illustration of the various steps. These are similar to those set out in the guidance provided by the Federal Government, but they are not quite the same. In putting together this table we have tried to take account of advice and practice from a variety of sources, and to apply them to our own circumstances. Inevitably therefore there are some variations from other models or advisory guides available elsewhere. Sector staff are encouraged to consider these sections as a guide. The steps are not a directed requirement. There are 12 steps in the process, and we have divided them into three stages. These are depicted in Figure 7. The three stages are: STAGE 1: Review and Preparation STAGE 2: Strategy Development STAGE 3: Documentation and Agreement The remainder of this section is organised under these three stages and the steps involved. One core requirement from the outset is that an effort is made to cost all of the proposed activities in the sector, including all personnel costs and overheads, and that this must be done within or close to projected resource availability ceilings. Therefore STEPS 2B, 2C and 2D ARE CRITICAL. NOTE ALSO that the table in figure 9 could be taken to imply that a wide range of people in the sector are responsible for doing everything. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Some specific tasks, such as 2C, are quite specialised. There will be specific individuals in the sector who will have the required knowledge and experience to perform these tasks well, and they need not involve everybody. (In the case of task 2C, this may be carried out by existing budget officers from the relevant MDAs.) However, try to involve a variety of different people at different stages. While some tasks are highly specialised, you need also to think about involvement of a variety of people, both within and outside your MDA. For example from within it, try to involve people with different perspectives and backgrounds especially those who may help to bring to the table views about the needs of different disadvantaged groups those who are for example socially, physically, religiously and gender disadvantaged or excluded. 19

20 Figure 7: Steps in the MTSS Process STEP TASK STAGE 1: Review and Preparation 1A 1B 1C 1D 1E Set up MTSS Committee Agree Terms of Reference for the Committee Identify and Review Existing Policy Statements, including sector and general, both state level, Federal and International. Agree sector policy position and establish draft three year outputs involve the HC at this stage Gather existing data and information that can be used on development of policy into strategy, including performance reviews involve the public here Receive or compile Information about Three Year Revenue Flows (expenditure ceilings) including both within state sources and others Describe existing contract and other budget commitments that are payable or you expect to be paid during the forthcoming years 2A 2B 2C 2D STAGE 2: Develop Strategy Run a Strategy Session (or series of sessions) - Review & Agree Policy Outcomes Based on Stage 1 Taking account of existing commitments, develop strategies (inputs and outputs) for the achievement of Outcomes Determine costs of activities and projects (including overheads) Review projected three year costs of personnel Make decisions about changes to the levels of activities and projects, and their phasing of input, so that expenditure ceilings are complied with in thespreadsheet include public consultation and perhaps a public forum STAGE 3: Documentation and Agreement 3A Discuss and agree the resulting sector strategy with the HC Make alterations as options where possible/desirable 3B Write MTSS document according to Table of Contents provided in the annex 3C Use the spread sheet to compile budget submission (following receipt of call budget circular) and use presentation based on MTSS document to defend it 20

21 STAGE 1: Review and Preparation STEP 1A: Set up an MTSS Committee and Agree ToR The first step for each sector is to set up or modify an MTSS Committee, charged with responsibility for developing the sector strategy. It may be tempting to involve a wide variety of stakeholders from within the MDA, and possibly including representatives from civil society. This would ensure wide involvement and could lead to greater ownership for the resulting MTSS document. However, developing strategy is the task of relatively senior officers. If too many people are included it is possible there will be too many vested interests to protect. We therefore recommend that you keep the committee quite small (maybe ten), but ensure that the key Directors are well represented, and that the required skills to carry out the work are provided for. Remember, as noted above, that it is not expected that this committee will do all the work itself. Some tasks, such as costing activities and fitting them to the budget structure, are very specialised, and there are specific officers in each MDA who have the required knowledge and skills to perform these tasks. Outline draft terms of reference for the Committee are provided in Annex 3 to this guide. A vital component throughout the MTSS process is Gender and Social Inclusion (G&SI). A checklist for Gender and Social Inclusion (G&SI) in the MTSS and planning processes can be found in annex 5 primarily guiding on G&SI considerations to be made during the preparation of Medium Term Sector Strategies in Kano State. STEP 1B: Review Existing Policy Statements As part of the exercise to develop sector strategies we do not necessarily recommend that any additional effort should be placed at this stage on developing policy, especially if existing policy guidelines including high level goals, are already well developed. In any case it is really the task of political leaders to determine policy. However, there may be a dilemma here if there are few existing policy directives with relevance to the sector where we are developing a strategy. In this case some work could be necessary first to develop this long-term outcome-defined direction. Although policy should be agreed at a State level through the Executive Council, if there is no state-wide agreed policy for your sector an initial step could be, as in the bullet points below, to develop some preliminary ideas within the sector or MDA. These may then need to be sold to the Executive Council, if possible, through the Honourable Commissioner. With respect to existing policy documentation, we suggest the following might be available and could be worth looking at: The Vision for the State; His Excellency s specific reform agenda; The State Development Plan; The latest state SEEDS document; and The Sector Plan and any National Policy document for your sector. 21

22 Members of the MTSS committee could ensure (prior to strategy development meetings) that the relevant documents are available, and that they are familiar with the direction described in them. The Committee should confer with the Honourable Commissioner at this stage of the process in order to ensure that there are no recent changes in policy direction being considered by the Government, and that the Committee s understanding of the policy direction for the sector is properly understood. STEP 1C: Gather Data, Analysis and Performance Reviews This task will present very different challenges for each sector, so it is not very useful to be prescriptive in this area. There is a section in the recommended structure of an MTSS report (see Annex 6) which describes the current situation in the sector, and what the Committee needs to satisfy itself that it has sufficient information available both to be able to write this section, and to underpin basic elements of sector strategy. An early and quick assessment of the current data position may need to be carried out by the Committee, and a decision made as to whether it is possible to plug any of the gaps in knowledge during the strategy making process. A very significant body of information will be provided by a performance review of the previous year or years of strategy implementation. Especially, what has been the impact of previous activities? What has been successful and what has not been successful. Monitoring systems that will collect information necessary for conducting such performance reviews are not routine, but are being developed and improved. If no reviews are currently being undertaken, the committee will have to proceed without them. A critical aspect of data collection and analysis is the compilation of questions used to drive this process. The questions asked will make a vast difference to the results we obtain and what we see, and this in turn will alter the strategy we develop as a result. A prominent and important example is the need to ask questions about the socially disadvantaged, including handicapped people. It is also highly desirable to disaggregate data between men and women to see where one sex or the other may be disadvantaged. Without collecting data of this sort it will be impossible to see and understand the nature of these differences, and as a result policy and strategy development will be ignorant of the need to resolve them. STEP 1D: Obtain Revenue Projection Information The core revenue flows to the sector will be from the State Government. However, other sources also need to be recorded and realistic ceilings for them described. It is not advisable in making a sector strategy as a basis for budget submission to compile a list of intended programmes and activities without being realistically confident that funds for the work will be forthcoming. Your MTSS should not include references to a funding gap with resources to be sought from uncertain sources. It is OK to include this in a sector plan, but not in an MTSS. 22

23 If the central Ministry cannot provide a timely budget envelope projection, it is prudent to work on your own best estimate of the allocation. This could be based on the levels of funding actually received over the past two or three years. The State Government has improved its ability to provide fiscal revenue projections. On the basis of this the Ministry of Planning & Budget expects to be in a position to issue outline expenditure envelopes to sectors for by the end of April This will be in the form of a Revenue Envelopes Projection Circular (REPC) or similar. These ceilings will comprise three elements: An overall discretionary expenditure ceiling for the sector and the MDAs within it; Indicative personnel costs (to be deducted from the discretionary ceiling); and A consequent balance remaining to cover overheads and discretionary capital expenditure. 1 Note that decisions about how these ceilings are calculated should have been determined by two factors: The total (conservative) estimate of the total amount of discretionary revenue available; and A decision by the Executive based upon policy statements as to the proportions of this fund to be spent in each sector (or upon each policy outcome). While in this State we have reached a position where we can provide the first of these conditions, we are not yet able to provide the second. Therefore call budget circular ceilings may only be determined on the basis of the same percentages per MDA as appeared in the 2010 budget, or on the basis of the same percentages per MDA of actual expenditure in On top of discretionary finance, the sector might have access to specific loans and grants. For example this could include the Federal UBEC fund for education; the Conditional Grants Scheme (MDG grants fund for any sector); or IDA loan projects. In addition there may be a case for showing an amount of contribution for joint projects with Local Government. Try to ensure that estimates of revenue from these resources are not over-estimated. For example it is common to assume that large sums are available from the UBEC fund for education. Finally there may be other sources of revenue which are explicitly tied to specific planned activities, and indeed may involve cash which is not delivered to the Government itself but are spent by other agencies. Examples include development partner programmes which make contributions in the form of training, and sometimes material inputs such as drugs and buildings construction. It makes sense to include these in the MTSS, though they may not necessarily appear in the State Budget. Figure 8 below demonstrates the kind of basic calculation the sector needs to undertake in order to build a strategy that it can afford. 1 Discretionary capital refers to sources of revenue for capital purposes which could be spent on anything. Non-discretionary funds sources are tied to specific lines of expenditure. So for example money provided to Education by the UBEC fund are tied to specific expenditure items. 23

24 The numbers in this figure are purely illustrative. Figure 8: Structure of the Budget Ceilings for an MDA Note: The figures in this chart are purely illustrative. A: Initial general revenue ceiling 5,000,000,000 B1: Current personnel cost commitment B2: Less Planned Retirements etc. B3: Plus additional staff from strategy plan B4: Total Personnel Cost C: Balance Remaining D1: Current overhead costs D2: Less those operationally not necessary D3: Plus extras determined by strategy D4: Total overhead cost E: Balance Remaining F1: Less, Existing Capital Commitments G: Balance Remaining for New Capital H: New capital projects proposed I: Balance Remaining (should approach 0, not negative) J: Non-Discretionary Finance Available 2,000,000, ,000, ,000,000 2,040,000,000 2,040,000,000 2,960,000, ,000, ,000, ,000,000 1,197,000,000 1,197,000,000 1,763,000,000 1,133,000, ,000, ,000,000 20,000, 000 2,350,000,000 The figure starts with a total discretionary ceiling, and progressively subtracts the existing commitments to personnel, overheads and existing capital projects. This will leave a balance of discretionary resources available for strategic decision making. The figure also illustrates inclusion of allocations for new personnel, overheads and capital expenditures, but within the overall ceiling. If you follow the structure of this figure to guide the financial aspects of strategic planning, it will help to ensure that all activities and programmes will be affordable. 24

25 STEP 1E: Existing Contract and Budget Commitments In practice most of our MDAs are saddled with a high degree of non-variable cost commitments. For example there are large salaries bills which could be reduced over a number of years most legitimately through what is termed natural wastage (mostly planned for retirements) but which for much of the three year MTSS planning period are unlikely to change very much. Also, most MDAs have a large number of incomplete contracts on their books, and many of these require allocations to be made for their completion. One of the advantages of medium term planning is that provisions can be made for these things over a number of years. Therefore it is no longer necessary to show the entire cost of a large project in one annual budget. Instead an appropriate proportion of its cost can be shown in a sequence of years. Each Ministry and most MDAs have existing commitments to make payments on incomplete capital contracts. Unless you have good reason to believe that some of these contracts will not be completed, their annual costs over the three years of the MTSS need to be taken into account. Although personnel costs are theoretically variable, altering (at least reducing) the numbers of personnel employed is politically sensitive and a very long term exercise. In effect your MDA is committed to making medium term payments for existing personnel, though some measure of reduction could be contemplated for natural wastage 2 (if you are in a position to estimate this). Finally there are certain overheads allocations which ought to be retained at least at their current level. These will be mainly those that provide for recurrent office operating, travel, utilities, maintenance and financial costs. Note that all the costs referred to here are being regarded as existing commitments things which will draw resources from the discretionary total available regardless of the strategies you develop in the medium term. As you go into the process of strategic planning, you will need to list these commitments, both variable and capital, and be aware of their costs and the reduced amount of money you therefore have available (within the ceiling provided) to spend on new programmes. The responsibility for compiling this information may best lie with budget officers in the relevant MDAs who should be expected to have this information to hand. 2 The term natural wastage refers to planned and expected retirements, plus resignations, plus (sadly) deaths in service. Retirements are predictable by age and length of service. Estimates of the others can be obtained by tracking and averaging their incidence over previous years. To make these estimates, reasonable data records are required. Other reductions might be predicated on an exercise that is planned to identify and remove from the payroll so called ghost workers. 25

26 STAGE 2: Developing Strategy STEP 2A: Commence Strategy Sessions Once the preparation work is complete, the Committee will be in a position to convene a preliminary strategy session involving a range of stakeholders and technical officers to commence the task of developing or revising sector strategy. Especially if your sector is doing this work for the first time, there will be quite a lot of work to do. Indeed, even if you run a five day strategy session, you still cannot be expected to complete the work necessary. It will only serve to start the process of developing strategy. To get to the end of the work described in this guide will probably take your MTSS committee about three months, depending upon the concentration of effort you are able to apply to the exercise. Of course if you already have a first year MTSS it will take less work to revise it. However, an annual exercise to revise, project and up-date the MTSS is required, every year. Having held an initial sector-wide strategy session, one option is then to split into a series of different sessions, ideally split along programme lines. For example if you can divide your sector into (say) six sub-programmes (education is an obvious case in point with basic, secondary, tertiary and so on) you may prefer to hold a one day introductory session involving a large number of people, and then break into a series of sub-groups to allow concentrated work, before re-convening a joint session (say after two or three months). There may be no hard rules for choosing the participants in the sessions. Most certainly the Directors from each department in the Ministry must attend, plus probably the Directors or Chairmen of each MDA under the Ministry. There may be some benefit in inviting other officers who have specialist technical knowledge. You may also decide to invite members from local representative NGOs or other public (non-government) bodies, such as professional and business associations or women s groups. This is not a requirement but it could help with making the strategies more responsive to public priorities and implementable later on. It s also good governance practice to involve trusted members of society in the exercise, especially as it should help them to understand the challenges of decision making within budgetary constraints. It might be wise not to make the group excessively large. It is normally easier to get work done in smaller groups than in larger ones where communication and understanding becomes more difficult. Of course the PS (or PSs) should be encouraged to attend as much of the sessions as possible. The deliberations will comprise thinking about issues at the heart of the sector Ministry(s) responsibilities. In addition, if the Honourable Commissioner attends some parts of the session or sessions then he/she will be better placed to understand the reasons, both technical and financial, for adopting certain strategies for the achievement of policy outcomes. This ought to be important when it comes to arguing the case defending the budget in the Executive Council. Relevant members of the State House of Assembly might be invited to attend for the same reason. By presenting the results of preliminary calculations of the ceilings supplied, with the costs of recurrent and capital commitments subtracted, attendees at the session will 26

27 know at the outset how much money there is available to plan with. This is critical to making the exercise realistic. Obviously the approach to the commencement of such a session or sessions is up to the sector managers concerned, but here are a couple of hints: First, apportion the main responsibility for developing and running the sessions to the Planning Department or departments in the relevant MDAs. Developing strategies to meet policy outcome expectations is obviously their key responsibility within the organisation. Commence with a presentation of the key information gathered under stage 1. STEP 2B: Develop Strategy for the Achievement of Outcomes The log-frame template below is intended to help you to commence and record the task of developing strategies defining outputs, programmes, projects and activities. It is not a requirement that you use precisely the structure of the template provided here. You may wish to modify it for your own sector. However, whatever table or template you use it ought to do the following things: Write the policy statement for your sector see the Sector M&E Framework. Describe the sector goal - see the Sector M&E Framework.. Describe each programme and the outcomes and KPIs linked to each programme - see the Sector M&E Framework. Describe each project and the outputs and KPIs linked to each project - see the Sector M&E Framework. Cost each of the activities; and Show the source of funds. The first task is to determine the programmes that will populate your sector. The log frame sheet may then be divided into main sections, one for each programme. It should be kept in mind that there are two kinds of things to think about here. First there are new activities or things that need to be done perhaps training courses, new buildings or additional staff. Then there are the regular things that are being done anyway such as employment of existing staff and maintenance of existing assets which are necessary to keep things happening. (Step 1E looked at what should be included here.) Figure 9: Logframe Budget Classificati on 26 SECTOR: Education Policy Statement: Sector Goal: Sector Objective/Target: Naira Naira Naira Output Outcome KPI Programme Statement: Promote equitable access and quality services in ECCED and basic education 0 0 Project Statement: Improve the quality of early child care 01 education Activity 1: Conduct Training workshops for 200 ECCED yeachers and cargivers each annually Activity 2: etc Activity 3: Activity 4: 27

28 Finally on the right of the worksheet are two further columns. In the first you may record a specific activity code. The suggestion is that this can simply be an index with a sub-sector number, the sub-output number, and the activity number. (This is illustrated in the template.) The last column must be filled which MDA is responsible for managing the recorded activity. In Annex 7 we provide some further guidance and pointers on how to go about developing strategy options. Advice is included there on: How to build rather than just repeat; Approaching capital versus recurrent rations constructively; Thinking about the contributions of other players relevant to the sector; Taking account of technical and capacity limitations; Identifying both new and current activities; and Ensuring political relevance of strategies developed. Each programme should be assigned a programme code e.g. 01, 02, 03 etc, and also each project should be assigned a project code e.g. 01, 02, 03 etc. There is no need to code activities at this stage. STEP 2C: Activities Costs, Ceilings, and the Budget Structure Step 2B has focussed on making strategy. That is, it involves the task of filling in the log frame template from the excel spread-sheet in Annex 8, so that you now have outcomes, outputs and activities defined for a series of programmes across the sector. You now face three critical tasks: The first is to develop costs estimates for the activities that are planned; The second is to work out how to transfer the costs so developed into the structure of the budget submission (if you don t do this then the budget your sector submits cannot reflect the strategy you developed, so all your hard work will be wasted); and Thirdly, you MUST ensure that the total costs of planned activities in each MDA do not significantly exceed the resource envelope ceilings you have been given. The work involved here seems quite complex to some staff, but it is quite well understood by most budget officers, and they should be charged with responsibility for conducting this work. STEP 2D: Policy Group Review of the Need for Changes In compiling your total costs calculations in the logframe template in Annex 8, you may well find that you have exceeded your ceilings, either in specific MDAs or quite likely across the sector as whole. SUBMITTING AN MTSS THAT CONTAINS COSTS SUBSTANTIALLY ABOVE THE CEILINGS PROVIDED IS NOT PERMITTED. Note the following general qualification to this statement: 28

29 In principle it is essential to keep plans realistic, and therefore within the confines of the ceilings provided. If the ceiling provided by the central Ministry responsible is realistic, and it is respected by political leaders in approving the budget, and a predictable (cash-flow based) system of releases against these planned allocations is put in place, then it makes sense for both the MTSS and the Budget to be made within the confines of the ceilings. Only by adopting an approach like this, which integrates strategies within a realistic Medium Term Expenditure Framework, can Government expect to deliver on the plans it makes. It therefore makes sense to work towards this end in making financially realistic strategic proposals for the sector. However, it is also true that in making an MTSS, sector representatives have the opportunity to make a strong case to political leaders for the release of additional resources (though this will imply shifting resources away from another sector). Therefore, an MTSS might reasonably include some limited (reasonable) additional allocations above a ceiling in support of such an argument. It seems unreasonable though to suppose that such an addition should exceed 10 percent above the ceiling provided for the sector. It will therefore be necessary to: Re-schedule some items to following years; and/or Alter the strategy, dropping some proposed activities or actions altogether. Inevitably in this process there will be options. Some of these options will entail making concessions to desired achievements in terms of quality, others in quantity of service provided, and perhaps some others in terms of their impact upon different parts of society (the wealthy or the poor, women or the disadvantaged, for example). Similarly some options will have major cost reducing implications, while others may have disproportionate negative impacts on results. It should be recognised that it is not actually the task of civil servants (therefore the members of the MTSS Committee) to make decisions about which options should be chosen. This is a political responsibility. Ideally politicians will make decisions that respond to the needs of as a wide a range of their constituents as possible, though political pressures do not always encourage this result. In order to encourage this process however it could be well worthwhile holding some sort of public forum for consultation over these options at this stage. Annex 9 details the options for public involvement in the MTSS process. It is essential therefore that at this stage the Honourable Commissioner, and possibly the relevant SHoA committee chair, be involved again. A way of approaching this could be to develop a small policy group for the sector, which would have high level representation. Such a group might include the PS, the Honourable Commissioner, any relevant Special Advisor, perhaps the Director of Planning from the relevant MDAs, the chairperson of the relevant sub-committee of the State House of Assembly, and perhaps two or three prominent representatives from Civil Society. Various options for reducing or rescheduling the strategic contents may be considered by this group. The HC s understanding of the options and commitment to the choice made, backed up by other members of the Policy Group, could be critical in justifying 29

30 its presentation to the Executive and the Legislature, and ultimately also to ensuring that cash is released to support implementation. But it IS the responsibility of civil servants to make informed recommendations to politicians about which are the best choices. Some brief guidance on how the strategic MTSS Committee and the Policy Group might go about considering and evaluating options, including financial and economic justifications, is presented in Annex 10. STAGE 3: Documentation and Agreement STEP 3A: Political Approval and Understanding If the Honourable Commissioner has attended some of the strategy session, or taken part in the Policy Group meetings, then he/she may already be in understanding and agreement about the contents of the draft strategy. In this case there may be little need for further discussion. However, if there is any doubt about this level of involvement, it will be advisable at this stage to conduct a formal and possibly extensive discussion over the contents. It will be essential for the future prospects of the implementation of the strategy to ensure that it is consistent with the expectations of the political class and that the Honourable Commissioner is in a position to present both the budget and its justification (the MTSS) to the Executive Council. STEP 3B: Produce an MTSS Document The MTSS document need not be all that long. After all it will be reviewed and revised in a years time, so not every detail needs to be covered. The critical purpose of the document must be to: Describe the process followed; Explain the connection between objectives (policy) and the activities that are planned to deliver them; Place the plan in the context of resource (especially financial) constraints; and Inform the public about sector strategies and about the basis for strategic decisions. In order to assist in this exercise, we recommend an outline table of contents as provided in Annex 6 to this guide. Please note that this outline is not a requirement. The outline is provided in the form of supporting advice. Sector ministries and their MTSS Committees responsible for producing these documents are free to make some alterations to the structure and recommended content. However, inclusion of the completed log frame presented in Annex 8 (or similar) is a requirement. STEP 3C: Presenting the Budget The MTSS is intended to ensure that when your Ministry makes its budget submission, the contents: Construct a clear link between policy and intended programmes and activities; and 30

31 That these are presented within realistic resource constraints, so that their implementation is a real prospect. In outlining detailed objectives and activities, the MTSS also presents a means of monitoring performance (see below). The MTSS should be complete by early to mid-august. (See the timeline outlined below.) Following this the Ministry of Finance will issue the Budget Call Circular. This should have been considered and approved by the Executive Council. During deliberations over the contents of the circular it is possible that the HC for your sector may have presented arguments based upon the MTSS (so long as s/he was fully involved this is possible). For this and other reasons the budget ceilings issued with the circular might be slightly different from those issued at the end of April. (Other reasons include fluctuations in the oil price, an expansion in the economy leading to improved estimates of VAT revenue, and perhaps an improved record or strategy for collecting IGR.) There may also have been other developments, such as an agreement to increase wages, which would have a significant impact on budget projections. If the budget ceilings have altered, it will be necessary to alter the plan of expenditure included in the table filled in from annex 5. However, making these changes should now be relatively easy. If there is more money available than originally expected, some activities from year 2 (2013 in this case) may be brought forward into year 1 (2012). If the amount of money available is less than expected, some activities may need to be dropped from year 1 to year 2. Once again, as described in the options section above, the HC should be involved in making decisions about which items to drop or bring forward. Following these refinements, the MTSS document (modified as necessary), including Annex 8, becomes the basis for the Ministry s (and its associated MDAs) budget submission. The arguments set out in the MTSS document become the arguments which the Ministry and its MDAs may use at budget defence. Involvement of the HC at critical points should help to ensure his/her support at Executive Council in making these presentations. 31

32 6.0 Other Critical Considerations 6.1 Monitoring Performance Monitoring and evaluation plays a vital role in the policy-making, planning, budgeting and implementation cycle. Ideally each sector will have developed a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (Documentation describing how people, organisations, data and time interact to measure the performance of the KnSG interventions (i.e. policies, plans, programmes and projects) and how they can be meaningfully assessed and improved. Within the context of the MTSS process, M&E can be expected to: Provide baseline and other planning data to inform policy-making and planning Identify appropriate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to: o Assist in refining the list of planned programme objectives (having indicators assists in determining whether the objectives are indeed relevant and achievable, and o Use indicators to measure actual achievements against planned outputs and outcomes during and at the end of an implementation cycle Conduct annual and other periodic reviews against policy and strategic targets to support management decision-making and to provide for learning and improvements in future plans and implementation. M&E may not be the responsibility of the MTSS Committee as this will reside in the Departments for Planning, Research and Statistics (DPRS) of the MDAs in the sector. Basic principles describing how performance will be monitored including a common approach to sector performance reviews and the use of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Given that M&E in the sector is still being developed, a quick assessment of the current data position may need to be carried out by the Committee, where information is not readily available, and a decision made as to whether it is possible to plug any of the gaps in knowledge during the strategy making process. A very significant body of information will be provided by a sector performance review of the previous year or years of strategy implementation. Especially, what has been the impact of previous activities? What has been successful and what has not been successful. A generic Annual Sector Review guide is currently being prepared but if no reviews have recently been undertaken, the committee will have to proceed without them. 6.2 Public Involvement Public involvement is a critical part of building both accountability and responsiveness of a growing democracy. However, there are all sorts of different ways of developing levels of public involvement. There are parts of the annual cycle process (see Figure 7) in which public involvement is probably best developed at first. These include the process of performance review, where representative organisations should be given a chance to see whether the government has achieved what it said it would do. However, it is preferable that CSO representatives be included at first in 32

33 developing MTSS (via committee membership) and understanding the process and its limitations (see below). Meanwhile Government prefers to undertake two or three years of performance review on its own first, getting used to using the results, before involving the public. It should be a positive incentive to work effectively on improving performance if staff and leaders are aware that in a few years time the public will be involved in this evaluation. We have also in this guide suggested means of including members of civil society in the strategy sessions, and possibly in the MTSS committee and the Policy Group. It may be worth noting a couple of critical things about this involvement: First, civil society members need to be informed about the limitations on strategic plans, such as those outlined in this guide. For example they need to be made aware of financial and capacity constraints. This should help to keep recommendations and expectations from the community realistic; Second, public participants may be expected to furnish information about strategies that work (and others that don t) and about contributions to service delivery that may be made by various non-government groups; and Third, it will be well worth keeping in mind the fact that various groups represent various different interests simply seeking involvement from a selection of CSO representatives will not necessarily yield an agreed public position on which strategies should be adopted. Some further guidance on how to improve public involvement is included in Annex 9 to this MTSS guide. 33

34 7.0 An Outline Timeline The majority of the work described above needs to be conducted during a four month period each year, from the beginning of April to the end of July. However, as made clear in Figure 5, the MTSS work fits within an annual cycle. Therefore for completeness, the chart below outlines a suggested plan of work covering the entire year. Figure 10: Suggested Timeline Task/Step Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Conduct Annual Reviews Collect data and information Review national policy guidance Refine State Policy Outcomes Receive Expenditure Envelopes Develop sector strategies & cost Review strategy within ceilings Prepare MTSS Document Receive Call Budget Circular Refine MTSS and compile budget Defend Budget using MTSS Make Operational Plan 34

35 8.0 Annexes 35

36 Annex 1: Strategic and Corporate Planning and Performance Management Linkages 36