BERF is helping DFID Ghana design a monitoring and evaluation framework and plan to underpin their Business Enabling Environment Programme and the work plans that will facilitate reporting on implementation progress at the output and outcome levels.
A consultant has been selected by DAI to undertake an assignment for DFID Ghana in three stages:
Stage 1: put together proposals on how to strengthen the M&E framework
Stage 2: assess existing Monitoring & Evaluation systems in implementing institutions, propose how cost compliance savings can be calculated for all reform areas, undertake an analysis of the Business Enabling Environment Programme logical framework
Stage 3: undertake a Theory of Change workshop and finalise monitoring framework and implementation plan.
The consultant completed the first stage of the assignment in April 2016, and the work was strongly endorsed by DFID Ghana. The consultant has started work on the second stage. A follow up visit is planned for May 2016.
DFID is providing up to £10 million between 2015 and 2019 under Business Enabling Environment Programme to help improve the Business Enabling Environment in Ghana. The project is supporting the Government of Ghana to enact reforms; build the evidence base for reform through independent analysis and research; and support Public-Private Dialogue to enhance the demand for and effectiveness of reform.
BEEP reform areas are:
Commercial justice and contract enforcement (including arbitration) – Commercial Courts of the Judicial Service and relevant agencies.
Improving taxpayer services particularly for Small and Medium Enterprises – Ghana Revenue Authority and other relevant agencies.
Local level business licensing fees, operating permits and building/construction permits – Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, and related regulatory agencies.
Private Sector Policy Facility – which focuses on promoting Public Private Dialogue
During the Inception Phase of Business Enabling Environment Programme it was concluded that Monitoring & Evaluation within the targeted institutions was weak. Even though some institutions undertake Monitoring & Evaluation activities, they lack adequate systems and capacity to consistently define data requirements, collect data and use data to guide management decisions. Data is inadequate for a number of the reform areas, with indicators focusing on activities rather than outputs.
Analysis was carried out in the four component areas which highlighted actions to enhance the Monitoring & Evaluation systems. These include setting up of systems, technical capacity-building and surveys to help report on programme progress against the logical framework and other sub- component targets not reflected in the logframe. The proposals under the different components have yet to be synthesised and rationalised into a coherent Monitoring & Evaluation plan for the programme as a whole.