PRESENTATION AT
OPENGOVHUB
PERSPECTIVES FROM GHAHA
OUTLINE

ABOUT GHANA

AGRICULTURAL REPORTING STRUCTURE IN GHANA

RESPONSIBILITY OF ACTORS

CHALLENGES OF REPORTING

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED

CONCLUSIONS
ABOUT GHANA

The Country
:
Constitutional Republic

Capital
:
Accra.

Administrative structure
:
10 regions, with 216 districts

Population (2010)
:
24,658,823

Population Growth Rate
:
2.5% per annum

Geographic Location
:
Latitude 4o 44’N and 11o 11’N;
:
Longitude 3 o 11’ W and 1o 11’E
:
550 km long

Coastline
Principal Agricultural Exports:

Principal Mineral Resources
Cocoa, Timber, Horticultural Products,
:
Fish/Sea Foods, Game & Wildlife
:
Petroleum, Gold, Bauxite, Manganese and Diamond.
LAND AREA BY REGIONS, %
GT.ACCRA
1.5
B. AHAFO
16.6
UPPER EAST
3.7
NORTHERN
29.5
CENTRAL
4.1
UPPER WEST
7.7
EASTERN
8.1
VOLTA
8.6
WESTERN
10.0
ASHANTI
10.2
SHARE OF GDP BY SECTORS, 2014
22.0%
49.6%
AGRICULTURE
28.4%
INDUSTRY
SERVICES
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR REPORTING SYSTEM (1/4)
1.
The Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) is the lead ministry responsible for
policy formulation and planning, monitoring and evaluation in the agricultural sector.
The agriculture sector extends beyond the Ministry to include fisheries, forestry and
logging and cocoa
2.
MoFA responds to the national development initiatives with policies and strategies
that address the national goals
3.
To achieve international, regional and national objectives/policies, the ministry has
developed a sector plan called Medium Term Agricultural Sector Investment Plan
(METASIP)for the implementation of the broad strategies specified in the various
policy documents.
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR REPORTING SYSTEM (2/4)
M & E Framework
Aligned
with
MDGs
CAADP
NDPC
METASIP
AGRICULTURAL SECTOR REPORTING SYSTEM (3/4)
M&ED
Regional
Directorates -10
District
Directorates 216
National
Directorates
Projects/
Programmes
M&E system for performance measurement (4/4)

Monitoring and evaluation, as a management function, should be carried out at all three
levels

National; Coordinated by M&E Directorate

Regional; Coordinated by RDA, supported by M&E Unit and

MMDA; Coordinated by DDA, supported by MISO

Level of effort in agricultural development is not the same at all levels, hence each level
perform similar but unique roles

Efforts at all the levels culminate in the preparation of an Annual Performance Report,
which form the basis of the annual Joint Sector Review.
CHALLENGES OF REPORTING (1/2)
1.
High staff attrition at district, regional and national levels
2.
Inadequate computers and software for data capture, storage and retrieval
3.
Limited M&E skills at all levels
4.
Not many M&E champions at strategic levels
5.
Frequent replacement of M&E staff
6.
Weak capacity in M&E reporting especially at the regional and district levels e.g. RBM
CHALLENGES OF REPORTING (2/2)
7.
Inadequate logistic for M&E activities at all levels e.g. vehicles, funds, computers,
internet connectivity etc.,
8.
Inadequate attention paid to M&E reports by some cost center managers
9.
Lack of consistency in some data collected at the district level
10.
Large number of indicators. There are currently about 60 indicators, which makes
11.
reporting difficult, cumbersome and sometimes boring
12.
Weak capacity at all levels (especially at the regional and district) with respect to
data analysis and interpretation of results
13.
Poor awareness of METASIP, national, regional and international objectives and
targets, and implication for data collection
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED, (1/6)
What will it take to make existing results data better and more useful for governments and
donors?
a.
It will take resources to facilitate data collection, capacity building to enhance the quality of
the data and commitment of supervisors to quality supervision.
b.
Individual donors trust their data but questions data from other donors and government.
c.
Efforts should be made to reduce setting up parallel systems in country. If there is the need to
improve the country system for use, that can and should be done. Donors should see
themselves as one unit and part of the system.
d.
It is also important for both Government and donors to agree to commit resources to
working with one results framework and ensuring that it is credible and sufficient to be used
by all donors. This will reduce the duplicity of data and conflicting data in the agricultural
sector which affects planning and decision making. Care should be taken not overload the
system, since each donor would want certain specific indicators to be captured in the system
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED,
(2/6)
How can existing results data be compared, shared, and used more effectively?
a.
Existing results data can be compared when the collectors understand the methodologies used and iron out any
inconsistencies that may exist. The data can then be shared with explanation for apparent differences if there are.
b.
Agencies that collect and use common data or in situations where data collected by one agency feeds into another
agency, there will be need for collectors and users of the data to meet regularly to share experiences and
particularly address any data inconsistences.
c.
There should be a data storage and retrieval system deliberately instituted together by all interest groups (DPs,
government, CSOs, NGOs etc.) and led by host countries. The system should be hosted by the sectors involved,
but with much guidance and direction from all key players. It is very important for every potential user of the data
to trust the system. The system must be made open and accessible to all interest groups. Opening of data is
essential to increasing transparency in its management, eventually leading to greater effectiveness and efficiency
and also capable of improving development outcomes at lowest cost.
d.
More specifically, among donors, this increased transparency is expected to improve coordination and minimize
redundancies in donor funding, highlight gaps and inefficiencies in aid allocation and in service delivery. This will
also improve monitoring and evaluation of programs, and ultimately increase donor accountability by empowering
citizens and governments with information about aid in their countries.
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED,
(3/6)
How do we make existing results data (as distinct from activity/output tracking) more
useful for governments, donors and implementers?

Officials implementing or collecting data to report on performance often focus on
activities implemented and immediate outputs and not outcomes. Although there is often
a lag before outcome results show, creating the awareness and building capacity of officials
to report on outcomes is important.

Also result data can be made more useful by giving it very good publicity. Efforts should
be made to cover all or at least majority of the citizens or those who have interest or
affected by the results. This way every institution will accept and use the data.
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED,
(4/6)
What institutional (both at country and donor level) and technical barriers prevent results [output and
outcome] data from being collected, analyzed and used to maximum effect? What will it take to address
these challenges?

Weak commitment by leadership. In adequate resources. Capacity to collect quality data, analyse and report.
Uncoordinated efforts in arriving at a common results framework and relying on a clearly defined system of
collecting data and reporting.

Prioritize data collection, analysis and reporting. Get national oversight that will ensure harmonization and
that resources are mobilized to support it.

Limited institutional capacity to collect and analyse data. No single donor or government has the capacity to
collect and analyse national data every time.

Player must learn to combine resources by all donors and governments to together execute
projects/programmes. This will allow data to be collected country wide on targeted indicators periodically.
Donors must be interested in the development of third world countries instead of pursuing largely their own
agenda. There should be practical commitment beyond the verbal commitment.
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED,
(5/6)
How can existing results data be compared across agencies to inform better policy
choices at donor and country level?

Ned for a very high level of coordination among the development agencies themselves and
the beneficiaries. No one seems to be regulating the activities of donors especially in the
developing countries.

Every donor agency has his or her interest and therefore tries to pursue that.
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS POSED,
(6/6)
Are we recognizing, reporting and learning from ‘bad’ results?

No. Analysis is weak, reports are not read and we are not learning from bad results and so
we are repeating them all the time.

Most often, bad results are not shared because of fear of criticism. It must be recognized
by all the bad results are also results that need to be publicized so the same mistakes are
not repeated by others and therefore saving scarce resources

Most often there is exaggeration of “so called” successes because we want to be seen in a
better light.
CONCLUSIONS

Results reporting is part of the development process and must be recognized as such.
Therefore whatever results are achieved must be shared by all, whether good or bad

Deficiencies in country systems must be identified and addressed instead of setting up
parallel systems

Government and donors must pool resources to set up transparent systems that can be
trusted by all

Governments must commit to own the process and commit resources to it.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION