Managing for Development Results at ADB

Results Matter January 2009

Sri Lanka’s MfDR Experiences
By Guanghui Li, Results Management Unit

Sri Lanka Ministry of Plan Implementation Secretary Mrs. Dhara Wijayatilake (right), demonstrates the Sri Lanka’s Electronic Project Management System

From 12 to 14 November 2008, the Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results (CoP–MfDR) held its 2008 Annual Meeting in Colombo, Sri Lanka. The meeting was cosponsored by the Asian Development Bank and the Ministry of Plan Implementation of the Government of Sri Lanka. A total of 36 CoP members from 15 developing member countries participated, and a representative from the African CoP-MfDR also attended. The selection of Sri Lanka as the meeting venue stemmed from the CoP– MfDR’s desire to see more practical on-the-ground MfDR experiences in a developing country.

Sri Lanka’s Best Practices

During the meeting, a Sri Lankan team, composed of champions from four different government agencies, discussed their MfDR experiences. The presentations were well received, and participants were impressed by the broad coverage and in-depth explanations on the current progress, challenges, success factors, and bottlenecks in MfDR institutionalization at the national, sector, and project levels. In particular, the following 10 points were highlighted by participants as the most inspiring experiences presented by Sri Lanka.

1. In Sri Lanka, MfDR receives top-level political support. The President chairs quarterly progress review meetings to assess development projects, programs, sectors, ministries, and institutions, with a focus on results. Such a high-level meeting provides guidance on MfDR agenda implementation and a forum for troubleshooting issues. Endorsement by the Cabinet of Ministers on the institutionalization of MfDR also indicates political will and policy-level commitment to the MfDR process.

2. The heads of the Department of Foreign Aid and Budget Monitoring of the Ministry of Plan Implementation are powerful champions of MfDR. A core group on MfDR, established to guide initiatives, is chaired by the secretary of the Ministry of Plan Implementation, with representation from the President’s Office, Ministry of Finance and Planning, line ministries, and development partners.

3. The MfDR approach adopted in Sri Lanka is a whole-of-government approach covering national, sector, institutional, and project levels. A results focus is being built into national development plan, sector plans, ministries, and various projects. Clearly, Sri Lanka’s ultimate goal is public sector and public financing reform, not just managing foreign aid or official development assistance.

4. The government strongly believes that the institutionalization of MfDR is fundamental to policy execution, improvement of accountability, transparency, and governance. Under the MfDR initiative, each ministry is requested to develop a clear mission, thrust areas, goals, and comprehensive performance measures. The national strategy includes time-bound actions, road maps, processes, institutional arrangements, legal frameworks, risk management, and capacity development.

5. The government uses the term “MfDR Circle” to describe the major elements and sequence of MfDR. It includes the setting of goals, agreements on targets and strategies, allocation of available resources, monitoring and evaluation, performance reporting, and feedback of information into the decision-making process. The process calls for the inclusion of the entire government and the participation of parliamentarians, civil society, media, and private sector as stakeholders of the MfDR Circle.

6. The MfDR process began with pilots. The previously mentioned comprehensive MfDR system was originally piloted with four key line ministries and is currently operational in 35 line ministries.

7. Another significant aspect of Sri Lanka’s MfDR system is the establishment of the National e-Project Monitoring System, which captures implementation progress and the results of all key development projects and programs in an intranet website. It provides policy makers and senior officials with online and real-time access to projects’ inputs, activities, outputs, and outcome information. Its wider use is in line with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness principles of enhancing the use of country systems. With regard to development projects, the Ministry of Plan Implementation has been working closely with megaprojects to develop key performance indicators that will enhance systematic tracking of results. A web-based evaluation information system is being developed to capture all major evaluation findings on a project-wide basis with sector synthesis to ensure wider use of evaluation information.

8. The Ministry of Plan Implementation also established a web-based MfDR platform to maintain and make available (online) the results framework and scorecard of each line ministry. The scorecard tracks the progress of line ministries toward their core thrust areas by using key performance indicators. Action is being taken by the ministry to ensure regular reporting of scores by all key line ministries.

9. A strong link exists between the Ministry of Plan Implementation and the Ministry of Finance and Planning, and performance information is extensively used in the budget process. For line ministries, outcome-based performance indicators and targets have been incorporated into the budgeting process. The line ministries’ Annual Implementation Plan sets out key deliverables and operational intentions and serves as a basis for reporting progress.

10. Using readiness assessment tools developed by the Asian Development Bank, the government conducted readiness assessment for key ministries and agencies in order to calculate their MfDR capacity gaps. The spiral diagram detailed this assessment’s preliminary results in nine core areas, and is regarded as extremely useful.