Midterm Evaluation of the Peru Decentralization and Local Governance Project Executive Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Midterm Evaluation of the Peru Decentralization and Local Governance Project Executive Report June 2015 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by an independent consultant, Dr. Thomas Moore, based on an evaluation prepared by a team of evaluators led by Dr. Carlos Aramburu for the Center for Consultancies and Integrated Services (INNOVA-PUCP), a sub-contractor to Partners for Global Research and Development LLC (PGRD) under contract No. AID-527-C-13-00002. ii EXECUTIVE REPORT MIDTERM EVALUATION OF THE PERU DECENTRALIZATION AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE PROJECT (PRODECENTRALIZATION) AID 527-C-13-00001 Final Revision on September 21, 2015 The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................. v Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 7 Evaluation Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Evaluation Questions .................................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Background ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Design, Methods and Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 8 Findings and Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Evaluation Purpose and Questions ............................................................................................... 13 Project Background ............................................................................................................................ 14 Evaluation methods & limitations................................................................................................. 18 Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations .............................................................................. 20 Findings ............................................................................................................................................................. 20 Relevance ........................................................................................................................................................................ 20 Effectiveness .................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Efficiency ......................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Sustainability and Ownership ................................................................................................................................. 32 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................................... 34 Project strategy and methodology ........................................................................................................................ 35 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................................... 38 References Cited .................................................................................................................................. 42 Annex 1: ProDecentralization Project Results Table ............................................................. 43 Annex 2: Statement of Work ............................................................................................................ 47 Annex 3: Evaluation Team ............................................................................................................... 65 Annex 4: Field work Report ............................................................................................................. 66 Annex 5: Data Collection Instruments ......................................................................................... 75 Annex 6: Key Informants .................................................................................................................. 85 4 ACRONYMS ANGR National Assembly of Regional Governments ARA Regional Environment Authority (Autoridad Regional Ambiental) CGR Comptroller General (Contraloría General de la República) COPARE Participatory Regional Education Council (Consejo Participativo Regional de Educación) CLAS Local Health Administration Community (Comunidad Local de Administración de Salud) CRED Health services to improve child growth and development CSO Civil society organization DG District Municipality Government DIRESA Regional Direction of Health (Dirección Regional de Salud) DO Development Objective FED Fund to Stimulate Performance (Fondo para la Estimulación de Desempeño) FOCAS Functional Organization Capacity Strengthening FONIPREL Fund for Promotion of Regional and Local investment (Fondo para la Promoción de la Inversión Regional y Local) GGD Decentralized Management Group (Grupo de Gestión Descentralizada) GoP Government of Peru GOREMAD Madre de Dios Regional Government GORESAM San Martin Regional Government GOREU Ucayali Regional Government ICI Institutional capacities index IR Intermediate result JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency JNE National Elections Jury (Jurado Nacional de Elecciones) KAP Knowledge, attitudes, and practices LG Local government (includes district and provincial governments) MCLCP Round Table for Coordination of the Fight Against Poverty (Mesa para la Concertación de la Lucha Contra la Pobreza) MEF Ministry of Economy MINAM Ministry of the Environment (Ministerio del Ambiente) MINCUL Ministry of Culture MINEDU Ministry of Education MINSA Ministry of Health v ONDS National Office for Dialogue and Sustainability (Oficina Nacional para el Diálogo y la Sostenibilidad), in the Presidency of the Council of Ministers Organism for Supervision of Public Contracts (Organismo Supevisor de OSCE Contrataciones del Estado PCM Office of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers PG Provincial Municipality Government PIP Public Investment Project PMP Performance Monitoring Plan POI Institutional Operating Plans QSIP Quality Service Improvement Plan RG Regional Government SERVIR National Civil Service Authority SD Secretariat for Decentralization (Secretaría de Descentralización) SGP Secretariat of Public Management (Secretaría para la Gestión Pública) SOW Statement of Work SUMA Quality Basic Education Reform Support Program TTAP Training and Technical Assistance Plan TUPA Administration Manual (Texto Único de Procedimientos Administrativos) UGEL Local Education Management Units (Unidades de Gestión Educativa Locales) USAID United States Agency for International Development, Peru Mission USG United States Government vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Evaluation Purpose The purpose of this independent external mid-term performance evaluation is to measure the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the ProDecentralization project design, approach, methodologies, tools, and activities. By testing the development hypothesis and program assumptions with facts from the findings, the evaluation identifies performance results, implementation challenges, unmet needs, and unexpected results. It provides information and develops recommendations intended to support Peru Mission of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in enhancing ProDecentralization activities and orienting future programming. It also summarizes lessons learned and best practices. This mid-term evaluation looks at the first two years of implementation, slightly less than half of the implementation period. Evaluation Questions 1. To what extent is ProDecentralization project achieving its results and targets, and how has it contributed to the improvement of the decentralized management and articulation of the State in health, education and environmental services in selected areas? What are the main factors that have limited or facilitated achieving expected results? 2. What activities, tools, or interventions are more successful than others, and what are the factors for their relative success? What current activities/efforts should be expanded or decreased? 3. How do the design, strategies, tools, and activities of ProDecentralization correspond with the needs, priorities, bottlenecks, and the evolution of decentralized management of services in the areas of health, education, and environment? 4. What type of technical resources and level of effort are used by ProDecentralization to improve the decentralized management of services in health, education,