BRIEF REPORT ON THE SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY CONFERENCE INTRODUCTION: The Conference on Citizen Engagement for Enhanced Accountability in Africa

organised by the World Bank drew participation from 19 African countries, Canada, Finland, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Among the 135 participants were Members of Parliament, Media and Communication Experts, Civil Society Organisations, Researchers and Donor Partners. Also present were the Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning of the Government of Ghana, Prof. George Gyan-Baffour who delivered the keynote address; the Country Director, Mr. Mats Karlsson and other World Bank Officials. (See appendix for list) The Conference was aimed at promoting information-sharing, skills development and networking among Social Accountability practitioners in Africa; raising awareness, recognition and support for social accountability initiatives through the participation of multi-stakeholder country teams and helping participants identify follow-up actions to support and strengthen social accountability initiatives at their various levels of operation regional and sub-regional levels.

The highlights of the 3-day conference included the opening ceremony; a talk show; a knowledge fair; panel discussions; plenary and parallel sessions on case studies of social accountability both at the community and national levels and skills building workshops. 1.0: DAY ONE PROCEEDINGS: 1.1: Opening Ceremony: The opening ceremony was attended by participants of the conference, Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, the Country Director of the World Bank and other officials of the bank. The facilitator for the day, George Matovu welcomed participants to the conference and thanked them for their willingness to share experiences and efforts at ensuring social accountability in their various countries. Highlights for the day were the opening ceremony which was addressed by the Country Director, the Deputy Minister for Finance and Economic Planning and Mary McNeil of the World Bank; a talk show on Social Accountability: What it is and Why does it Matter and Setting the Stage: Governance and the Role of Citizens in Africa; and three showcase presentations of Social Accountability initiatives; Plenary Sessions in the afternoon where case studies of Social Accountability at the National level in 6 African Countries were presented; Parallel sessions for Independent Budget Analysis, Public Expenditure Tracking and PRSP Monitoring were held and case studies from Malawi, Zambia, Ghana, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Tanzania and Benin presented; Questions and Answer time for the sessions and The opening of a knowledge fair

The Country Director of the World Bank, in his opening address, indicated that decentralisation is the key to development which offers an expansion of life choices for people. He mentioned that the World Bank has supported decentralisation for many years in various countries around the world and cited the case of Ghana as a

big challenge as well as an opportunity for the government to review its PRSP II in the context of social accountability. He further stated that participatory budgeting could be used to complement democracy in many African states as was the case of local states in Brazil which began about 15 years ago. Citing Ghana and Sierra Leone as examples, he noted that a lot is been done presently at the district and local levels such as the HIPC initiatives, donor funded projects, NGO/civil society programmes etc. to complement the District Assembly Common Fund (DACF), but, challenges to sustainable development still remain. He then proposed participatory composite budgeting at the district level to promote the expansion of choices for the local people. For instance, in Sierra Leone, local-driven projects as opposed to donor-driven programmes are being promoted. In this initiative, local council members convened as part of a Rapid Results Process and drew up a budget for their councils for the next 100 days. Once finalised, local people made the procurements and implemented the activities and objectives. Each pilot project succeeded with the participatory budgeting indicating enormous capacity at the local level for development and democracy. He promised to make a submission of the Sierra Leone example at the next meeting in Washington. In a keynote address read on behalf of the Minister of Finance and Economic Planning by his deputy, Prof. Gyan Baffour, it was emphasised that social accountability was consistent with the goals of the current Government which seeks to foster good partnership between civil society and government. He further cited the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) and the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD) which Ghana is keenly implementing as credible evidence of Government pursuing social accountability in Ghana. He mentioned that the relevant legal framework is in place to promote accountability and outlined it as follows: The Constitution and three arms of Government are in place to ensure transparency and accountability with the media offering alternative views to government; The Right to Information Bill which is currently in its final stage of consideration is aimed at deepening social accountability and promoting democratic governance and citizen participation and A 15-member local government council which has been formed to review functions of District Assemblies.

He emphasised strong cultural value systems as a way to promote social accountability. In conclusion, he expressed the need for African governments to collaborate and dialogue with civil society organisations to identify strengths and weaknesses to fight poverty and promote development. On the concept of Social Accountability, Mary McNeil of the World Bank gave a brief background in which she alluded to the fact that the practice of social accountability in the public sector should be proactive so that public officers and service providers could be held accountable. She emphasised that this was crucial for improvement in service delivery, governance and development. 1.2: Talk Show Segment In Setting the Stage and discussing Governance and the Role of Citizens in Africa, an innovative aspect of the conference which attracted a lot of participation and contribution was the talk show. The theme, Social Accountability: What is it and

Why does it Matter? was the focus of the discussion and had on the panel, Prof. George Gyan-Baffour, the Deputy Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs of the Government of Ghana and an Hon. Member of Parliament; Ms. Rudo Chitiga, the Deputy Director of the Commonwealth Foundation, UK; Mr. Norbert Mao, Hon. Member of Parliament, Uganda and Mr. Soule Issiaka, the Director of the Radio Netherlands Africa Programme, Benin. This was moderated by Ms. Audrey Gadzekpo of the School of Communication Studies of the University of Ghana. The panel held a unanimous view that African people have political, social cultural, economic rights to demand social accountability from public officials in Africa and such rights have their antecedence from traditional cultural values and beliefs. Examples were given of festivals in Ghana during which rules are suspended to enable citizens comment on the chiefs actions without sanctions or a day in the week is set aside for the head of family/clan to account for their management of assets and any disputes are settled. Panellists summarised the problems of social accountability in Africa as the inability of elected officials to be held accountable to the electorate, the principal-agent problem where technocrats use long tenure office and experience to frustrate politicians thereby not being accountable to elected officials and voters and lastly, the inability of some civil society groups to account to the people they represent. While all panellists agreed on the need for citizens and civil society to be more organised, more proactive, and have the capacity and willingness to participate in decision making, what remained in contention was the stage at which citizens should be involved in decision making. On factors that promote social accountability, panellists identified a democratic political system, a vibrant media and an informed civil society. The challenges for social accountability included how to harmonise the three worlds namely government, civil society/NGO and the citizenry. Other issues and concerns that came up were that Social accountability is expensive and time constraining. Governments find it difficult and expensive to consult the broad masses. It was however suggested that this cost should be included in the budget for funding of such projects and programmes. The World Bank a key proponent of social accountability in Africa is itself bureaucratic and dictates conditionalities to elected governments in Africa which makes it difficult for them to account to the electorate. There is the need for the World Bank to allow respective governments to have ample time to involve citizens in the preparation of PRSP in Africa. Accountability issues should be extended to the WB/IMF. On the participatory nature of the PRS, a participant explained that the directives from the World Bank and IMF with respect to deadlines were difficult to meet and at the same time fully consult with the people. Otherwise, in the case of Ghana, the constitution makes enough provision for an effective planning process and with the GPRS, information already gathered was used and follow-up discussions held in 30 districts. There is the need to demystify the concepts and tools of governance and simplify issues for the people to understand and be able to contribute meaningfully to the development process. It is pertinent to emphasis that

leadership needs to learn how to work with the people to enable them make meaningful contributions. This is a big challenge to elected government in the face of limited resource. Apathy on the part of citizens frustrates governments efforts to involve citizens in decision making processes. There is the need for social accountability to ensure that development goals are achieved, that the government succeeds and that people feel part of the whole process. It was noted that people are apathetic because they feel that government systems are fraudulent and this raises the problem of leadership to the fore. The media plays an important role in informing the citizens but the media themselves need to be informed properly in order to inform citizens. There is the need to build the capacity of civil society organisations to promote advocacy and social accountability and civil society participation in gender budget initiative and public expenditure tracking system. The major issue was the power of information in social accountability and the need for this to be continuous, up-to-date to ensure transparency and ensure accountability to the citizenry. Consultation should be a continuous process and not a one-time thing along the chain of project design, implementation and evaluation. Accountability for the government of African states is more of informing the people rather than consulting them from the very beginning so that ideas expressed by the people are not considered. Explaining issues to them should not be an end to the consultation which is necessary for their effective participation. Governance in most African states is not democratic because peoples ability to exercise their franchise is equated to democracy which is not correct. It must be noted that there is more to democracy than just voting.

It was concluded that accountability should remain broad based and consultative and participatory as possible. Additionally, as people have been entrusted with the power to take decisions on behalf of the broad masses, there is the utmost need to render account to them; and finally, citizens should not be seen as clients but real participants in ensuring accountability. One participant summarised it as people are fed up of being victims of bogus policies thrown at them and want to be shepherds of their own destiny. 1.3: Plenary Sessions Plenary Sessions were held after the talk show and these focussed on the theme for the talk show, Social Accountability: What is it and Why Does it Matter and Social Accountability at the National Level. Reiner Forster gave a short conceptual overview to the topic and an introduction to case study presentations from Tanzania, The Gambia and Uganda. These are

The Gender Budgeting Initiative (GBI) in Tanzania by Mr. Hebron Mwakagenda of the Gender Budgeting Network, Tanzania; Participatory Monitoring of PRSP Implementation by Mr. Falu Njie from the Strategy of Poverty Alleviation Coordination Office, The Gambia; and Public Expenditure Tracking in Education Sector in Uganda by Mr. Zerubabel Ojoo, a Consultant with the World Bank in Uganda.

A session of Questions and Answers brought to the fore the fact that the GBI in Tanzania was a civil society organisation initiative and that the practice of gender budgeting could be extended to other vulnerable groups. In the Gambia, indicators generated by grassroots were not different from those used in poverty assessment and after the pilot phase, an NGO/CSO has taken over the M & E of the PRSP. Also the Ugandan study was on regional and district levels and in both rural and urban areas and although output measurement was not part of the objectives, it could be done with the help of M & E tools. The media especially the print media has had magnifying effect and been very effective in giving feedback to the people. It was concluded that participation should be built into all aspects of the PRSP since it is a learning experience. On Social Accountability on the National Level, Dr. William Ahadzie of the Centre for Social Policy Studies of the University of Ghana gave an introduction into National level Social Accountability initiatives and the following case studies were also presented:

Independent Budget Analysis and Advocacy by Mr. Dalitso Kubalasa of the Malawi Economic Justice Network; Monitoring PRS Implementation, Analyzing and Tracking Poverty Expenditures by Mr. Robert Salati of the Civil Society Poverty Reduction Network, Zambia; and Community Voices Annual Scorecard of Civil Society Assesment of ProPoor Policies and Programs in Ghanas PRS by Mr. Sulley Gariba of the Institute of Policy Alternatives, Ghana.

1.4: Parallel Sessions There were 3 parallel sessions for the day which were facilitated by the local partner institution, the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER), University of Ghana and a summary of these sessions and major issues are outlined below. Dr. William Ahadzie, who facilitated the session on Independent Budget Analysis (IBA) noted the rampant incidence of poor service delivery, widespread corruption, abuse of discretion, lapses in funds disbursement by public service providers in Africa and introduced the 2 case studies.

Independent Budget Analysis in Kenya by Albert Mwenda, Institute of Economic Affairs, Kenya; This covered what IBA is, the rationale for it in Kenya, how it was done, and lessons learnt which included the need for a non-partisan profile of those doing the budgeting, the need for budget networks at local levels, the need to build capacity of civil society groups and adopting a sector approach.

Child Friendly Budgeting in Zimbabwe by Mr. Bob Libert Muchabaiwa of the National Association of NGOs, Zimbabwe

Parallel Section Two on Public Expenditure Tracking was facilitated by Prof. Clement Ahiadeke and had 3 case studies: - Public Expenditure Tracking Survey (PETS) in Sierra Leone A. Bangura of the Ministry of Finance, Sierra Leone

This covered background and objectives of PETS in Sierra Leone, phases 1 and 2 findings of the study which was done in collaboration with World Bank and DFID (UK) in March 2003, phase 3, its impact and lessons learnt. Some of the major impact of the study was the financial decentralization in Sierra Leone, transparent distribution channels being developed by MDAs, publication of funds released for education and agricultural inputs in the newspapers, increased participation through the setting up of District Budget Oversight Committees to track and monitor allocation of resources and the introduction of MTEF/PETS Forms I and II for effective participation and expenditure tracking. Lessons learnt included the fact that PETS is effective when undertaken in few sectors and focus is on the collection of data directly required for the exercise. - Monitoring Expenditure for School Committee Training and Teacher in -Service Training by Rosaline Castillo, Director, Maadili Centre, Tanzania Education Network (TEMNET) Tanzania The objective was to ascertain whether funds allocated for School Committee Capacity Development (SCCD) and In Service Teacher Training (INSET) at the national level were disbursed to district and school levels. This included Training program on the basics of budgeting in education for NGO members of the TEMNET The study revealed that SCCD funds meant for schools were held at the district level for no just cause and tracking from the Ministry to district level as well as calculating INSET funding at district level proved difficult a problem with transparency and access to information. The study constituted a good initiative towards NGOs/CBOs engagement in monitoring and evaluation of education finances to ensure participation, accountability and transparency. - Tracking District Assembly Common Fund (DACF) in Ghana by Dr R. King The presentation stated the main objective which was to monitor the release of DACF, check whether spending follows guidelines and understanding of issues bordering DACF by community members and also establish the extent to which communities are involved in the implementation of the DACF projects. The methodology, findings that DAs were not transparent with the beneficiary communities in the award of contracts; hence the people lacked power to demand accountability from those who executed such contracts meant to improve their welfare and recommendations that CBOs should be empowered to track public expenditure effectively because the real issues are at the community level, were made. Discussions outlined the following: - Observations of financial leakages were the same in all the countries and sectors namely education and health. - The concept of capture used in the presentation is same as leakage. - The study in Ghana found no discrepancies in the amounts transferred to the districts but some of the projects did not reflect the funds allocated. - The practical implication of PETS is the growing recognition and willingness of politicians to make changes and ensure transparency. - There is the need to build the capacity of CSOs to ensure that answers are obtained from duty bearers. - The mechanisms implemented to bring change/ possibilities of plugging leakages included financial decentralization. - The use of PETS forms in Sierra Leone has not encountered any serious problems because they were developed within participatory approach. - The need to share experience in order to address the capacity problem of CSOs for effective public expenditure tracking was stressed.

Social accountability should be extended to the traditional authorities since they hold assets in trust for the people.

Parallel Session 3 was on Poverty Reduction Strategy Programme Monitoring which had two presentations and facilitated by Dr. Ellen Bortei-Doku Aryeetey. Participatory Monitoring of PRS Implementation in Primary Education in Benin by Ms. Anne Floquet and Mr. Roc Mongbo, FIDESPRA, Benin and HIPC Watch (Ghana) by Cuthbert Baaba Kuupiel, SEND Foundation Ghana.

Key issues from these presentations were - the need for peoples perception to be part of the monitoring system and the overall development process; - that civil society organisation-led monitoring and evaluation in HIPC-funded projects serve as an effective tool for promoting participation - that the poor at the local level are keen to engage in dialogue. - Low level of CSO capacity - Feedback from public institutions has been weak - Unwillingness and entrenched suspicion of public office holders of CSO initiatives - The need to adopt capacity building approach 1.5: Knowledge Fair The days programme ended with the opening of the Knowledge Fair. This involved the display of documents, information and visuals from all over the world where social accountability was being pursued and case studies in both developed and developing countries. The fair was on for the period of the conference. Some participants brought brochures, newsletters, short documentaries and documents on what they were doing in their various countries. This was another innovation which was high patronised by participants and recommended for replication to enhance information sharing to promote social accountability in Africa. DAY TWO: 2.0: Introduction The Second day started with an overview of the main activities for the day and the various presentations by Mr. Bara Gueye, Coordinator of the International Institute of Environment and Development, Sahel. 2.1: Plenary Session There was a plenary session on the Critical Role of Information for Social Accountability and had 3 presentations. Mr. Soule Issiaka who facilitated the session highlighted the importance of information to social accountability as follows: Information helps build the capacity of the informer and the informed; Information is a must and a human right; Information empowers people He drew attention to the erroneous view that is there is too much information whereas the situation is rather one of too much repetitive information. The 3 presentations were:

Transparency and Accountability through Improved Access to Information by Ms. Nana Oye Lithur. She pointed out that there was poverty of information

and access to information is a human right and the foundation upon which other rights are exercised. She emphasises that it is the oxygen of democracy and the voiceless are given a voice.

Social accountability and the Media by Mr. Martin Nzegang of Cameroon who cited the watchdog role of the media in Cameroon who launched a massive media campaign that resulted in the imposition of high taxes on imported poultry and lower taxes on local poultry. The Power of community radio by Mr. George Matovu: an example from Zimbabwe indicated that community radio was used to sensitize the public on the basic rights, good governance, accountability and transparency and tracking development projects.

The following challenges were identified: The issue of sustainability of the freedom of information in Africa, Assisting civil society organisations to be interested in advocating for freedom of information, will power to ensure social accountability and the need for a strong regulatory body to avert the tendency of using community radio for politicising issues and anti-development agenda.

Another panel discussion before the lunch break had presentations on Social Accountability at the Community Level. Examples were from Niger, Zimbabwe and South Africa and it was facilitated by Mr. Bara Gueye, IIED Sahel, Senegal. The first presentation on Citizen Participation, Transparency and Accountability in Local Governance in the City of Nguigmi in Niger by the Mayor of Nguigmi, Mr. Moussa Moustapha highlighted the involvement of all stakeholders in the preparation of the long-term strategic plan for the community. On Rural School Fees Expenditure Monitoring in Zimbabwe, Ms. Joy Chidavaenzi pointed out that the strong will of the community through the power of information caused the transfer of recalcitrant headteachers and other staff and the renovation of school buildings. On Performance Monitoring of Provincial Service Delivery in South Africa, Colm Allan, alluded to the fact that citizens needed to be informed about how much money was given to the provinces, how they planned to use these funds effectively and how they implement these plans and how these are monitored and the problems with the delivery of public services. 2.2: Parallel Sessions Parallel Session 1: Community Monitoring of Service Provision and Local Government This was facilitated by Falu Njie and had 2 presentations.

Citizen Report Cards at Community Level by Thumbiko Msiska, CARE, Malawi

This presentation gave a background, methodology and findings of a survey to assess the adequacy of funding of Priority Pro- poor Expenditures (PPEs). Some of

the lessons learnt are Governments recognition of PPEs in the budget, the prioritisation of education, the involvement of lower level structures in budget formulation, and the adoption of strategies to facilitate accountability. Challenges Identified include pockets of resistance among some government officials thereby making access to information for effective monitoring difficult. The methodology for data collection needs to be effective and taking the budget work to the grassroots poses serious challenge to CSOs due to inadequate skills and resource constraints. The way forward in his view was a conducive legal/policy framework for a successful budget monitoring, capacity to monitor/advocate, credible CSOs, effective demand for social services and involvement of people for ownership and adequate resources. District Level Summary of Scorecard Dissemination (Iganga District) by Zerubabel Ojoo, Uganda According to the presenter, the goal was to improve the ability of rural households to articulate their rights to health care service. The key elements were participation, equity, transparency, accountability, access to information, and shared responsibility. The contribution of Quality Service Delivery Scorecard (QSDS) followed by community focus on perception of services, negotiated action plan provided suggestions from both users and providers. Challenges identified were Many actors are involved in these activities in an uncoordinated manner Already instrument/ methodology developed to facilitate engagement between service providers and users Other stakeholders at higher levels need to be involved Methods of scoring need to be reviewed given the illiteracy level in the community. The mood meter based on facial expression ranging from 1 to 5 (very bad, bad, okay, good, very good) takes less time to explain. However, the 1-100 scale facilitates scoring for minor improvements. Scaling up of methods to incorporate the elite or urban class is now being considered. Dissemination strategy for sharing of results with important stakeholders including political leaders is advocated. Social accountability issues need to be on the agenda within PRSPs to ensure that results are delivered Parallel Session 2 was on Local Level Participatory Budgeting and Expenditure Tracking and facilitated by Marguerite Monnet. Examples were from Mozambique, Malawi and Senegal. Presentations were on PADEM programme in Mozambique by Omar Mangeira, Swiss Development Corporation, Mozambique; Monitoring of the Government Education Budget in Malawi by Limbani Nsapato, Civil Society Coalition for Quality Basic Education (CSCQBE), Malawi; Participatory Budgeting on Local Government Level in Senegal by Marieme DIOP and Awa Faly BA. In all these presentations, issues identified include social accountability should be stronger, institutional changes in the management of public affairs. The tools should be replicable and sustained over the years. Civil society, donors, traditional authorities should be involved. The participatory tools should pay attention to all stake holders and proper diagnosis of problems. Challenges that emerged include high illiteracy, inadequate mechanisms for capacity building, collecting vital data and dispute settlement taking the needs of the communities into consideration. Parallel Session 3 - Enhancing Rights and Citizenship at the Community Level was facilitated by Carmen Malena of the World Bank and the two presentations made

were on Rights based Approach in Malawian Educational Sector by Mr. George Matovu and National Anti Corruption Network in Burkina Faso by Luc Damiba of REN-LAC Key Issues Basic understanding of Rights Based Approach Popularising Bill of Rights Enabling constitutional climate Horizontal and vertical networking Empowering Powers of commissions Key role of Media and challenges Moving from participant to citizen 2.3: Country/Sub-regional level Action Planning The late afternoon session was a period of brainstorming on a country/sub-regional level and this was facilitated by Prof. Ahiadeke. Participants were divided into their various sub-regions namely Anglophone West Africa, Francophone West Africa, East Africa and Southern Africa. DAY THREE 3.1 Plenary Plenary session on the morning of the last day of the conference focused on Critical Factors and Challenges for Social Accountability Initiatives. The panel was made up of Ms. Rudith King, Bara Guaye, Ms. Rudi Chitiga and Colm Allan and discussions were facilitated by Ms. Carmen Malena. The key issues thrown up for discussion included Willingness and Capacity of Citizens to Demand Accountability Panellists identified the lack of organizational capacity such as technical, management, advocacy and lobbying among CS as a weakness in ensuring social accountability. In addition, it was observed that the absence of strong national body to push for legitimacy to ensure that CSOs are listened to by those in authority undermines their efforts. This calls for amendment of laws regulating CSOs in the various countries. It was observed that low levels of literacy and type of education received at the basic level were responsible for the low capacity and interest of the citizenry to demand social accountability. There was therefore, the need for the incorporation of civic education in the curriculum of basic schools to address the situation. In addition, politicians should change their mindsets that the citizens are ignorant. They should rather see citizens as bosses with entitlements and they (office holders) as employees. Therefore, they have a duty to render account to them. Citizens sometimes fear to disclose what they know to make people accountable. Laws that allow for accountability should be available then the citizenry can be confident that it not dangerous to disclose information and make people accountable. The need for self-regulation among CSOs to ensure credibility and integrity was considered as critical to effective SAc. This is because only credible CS can mobilize public energy to get shift from rhetoric to action at the governmental level. It was agreed that effective SAc requires enlightened citizenry who know their rights and responsibilities.

Willingness and Capacity of African Governments to be Accountable

There was consensus that there are structures, legal framework and capacity existing to enable the governments to be accountable. The governments have structure and capacity to listen, disclose and answer; hence they cannot downplay SAc. However, there is fear on the part of some officials for being exposed, so they tend to prevent information flow. CSOs should therefore acknowledge and encourage officials who provide information. There is the need to strengthen the relationship between CSOs and parliament, anti corruption agencies and constitutional bodies to ensure effective social accountability. Capacity for accountability should be seen in terms of human resource, process and institution. It was suggested that the concept of accountability should be incorporated in the curriculum of civil service training institutions and universities to help change mindsets of people before they assume their roles as citizens, technocrats or duty bearers.The extensions of social accountability to religious and traditional institutions was advocated, since they serve as intermediaries for the state and the people The panellists agreed that there was the need to distinguish the executive from legislature since the latter serve as conventional check and balance on the former. Mechanisms Panellists advocated for the institutionalization of SAc and added that this should be an organic process. The institutions do not just happen - it is part of the people and the people are embedded in cultures that do not easily change. There are structures, mechanisms, available to make governments accountable to people at the grass root level. The issue is how to transform the administrative nature to be acceptable with a positive impact. Another dimension to accountability is the issue of international loans contracted when citizens do not know the long term benefit. Who should be accountable to these people? At the end of the panel discussions it was agreed that social accountability should be holistic, national and all embracing rather than an option. 3.2: Skills Building Workshops Parallel Workshop 1: Independent budget Analysis This was a skills building workshop and it was facilitated by Dr William Ahadzi. He highlighted on the definition of a public budget, the three characteristics of transparency, participation and accountability, the need for a strong legislature that is enforced and an efficient and effective audit system to make the budget legitimate. He also mentioned some problems. Questions on the need for civic engagement in budgeting were raised. Some of the advantages of this were outlined as follows: - It serves as an entry point to democratising fiscal policy making; - It makes tracking of policies at the community level possible; - It presents an avenue to engage legislature, educate citizens on their rights and responsibilities The budget cycle of Formulation, approval, Implementation and evaluation was presented. Presentation of the state actors and non-state actors as well as tools available to these at each level of the cycle was made. For state actors, Annual estimates, Appropriation Act, and other forms of Authorisation and Audit, Courts were identified as tools and for the non-state actors especially CSOs, Participatory Budgeting Memos, attending committee management meetings, lobbying with MPs, Expenditure Tracking and Service Delivery Surveys were identified.

There were questions on methodology to use to obtain information from specific groups and how much detail is involved in the analysis of the budget among others.

Parallel Workshop 2: Participatory Expenditure Tracking Surveys The resource person for the second parallel workshop Mr. Zerubabel Ojoo introduced participants to the various steps of Participatory Expenditure Surveys (PETS). Mr. Ojoo indicated that there are problems in service provision and PETS is a standard tool to bring change in the system, but in using this tool, African governments face problems in terms of quality, quantity and cost. Therefore in employing PETS, there is the need to scan through the system by applying the following steps; 1. Define the problem 2. Understand the decision making process of the target sector 3. Understand the flow of resources in the system 4. Define the objectives of the PETS 5. Data requirements 6. Questionnaire design and content 7. Data entry, cleaning and analysis 8. Sampling Issues 9. Fieldwork Organisation 10. Test Pilot questionnaire 11. Other pertinent issues such as estimating cost in undertaking PETS, dissemination plan and a timeline to execute PETS. After a thorough lecture on the PETS steps, participants shared their experiences and posed a number of questions which led to a lively discussion with the salient points being; Even though PETS is an additional and complimentary tool to streamline the system, CSOs must help constitutional institutions in African countries to be strengthened and streamlined to take over and perform its role effectively. Hence the need for an overall institutional reform to ensure sustainability instead of stressing a parallel structure. The dissemination plan must aim at achieving the desired change. Parallel Workshop 3: Participatory Performance Monitoring Using Community Score Cards This was facilitated by Falu Njie. He mentioned that the community scorecard processes included input tracking, performance and self-assessment scorecard as well as interface meeting to discuss action plan. The group assignment was to develop a scorecard to assess the performance of a basic school facility. The objectives were to generate performance scorecard by clients (parents and pupils) and self-evaluation scorecard by teachers, and discuss the results in an interface meeting and suggest action plan. The group was further divided into three focus groups to assess the level of satisfaction with the performance in the school. Based on their understanding of the situation in the school, each group brainstormed and generated a maximum of 5 indicators to assess the level of performance, and went through the process of scoring by individual members. They provided reasons for the high/low scores for each criterion. In view of the limited time, participants were not able to go through the interface meeting.

Discussion/ Lessons Indicators had to be negotiated in order to engender effective participation Indicators should be defined positively to measure progress Need to analyze the scores in terms of gender for effective results It was realized that the use of the terms service provider and user could make some people defensive and adversely affect the exercise. The participants were encouraged to use local people as facilitators to engender confidence in the process. Management of the whole process to ensure that all stakeholders understand and agree on the criteria was stressed. Parallel Workshop 4: Participatory Budgeting 3.3: Sharing of Experiences and Questions and Answers Sharing of Experiences and Questions and Answers were part of the Plenary as well as parallel sessions of the conference. These sessions were very informative, educative and challenging. Participants were of the view that some of the issues that came up and publications from Anglophone countries could be translated into french for the francophone to learn from and vice versa. SUB-REGIONAL GROUPING REPORTS - Programme Of Action Country/sub-regional level action planning continued and participants later reported back on their various programmes of action. West Africa Level Action Planning The facilitator was Mr David Korboe. Discussions centred on the issue that there could be an institution that is a coalition which will come up with various issues e.g. CDD in Ghana. However this has long term financial implications so there could be joint proposals and joint action which would be a multi-country experience sharing and learning. Proposals should be basically exchanges of expertise and experiences and looking more at the networking level e.g. RRI initiative in Sierra Leone. A tour is being organized to met those who made the initiative happen. When councils started in Sierra Leone, funds were given to officials and within100 days they had to come up with initiatives to make a difference and they did. The Action plan in Ghana includes some CSOs involvement in tracking the government and they could be helped to enhance their capacity and do more. e.g. ISODEC and HIPC Watch. In Sierra Leone the district assembly plans dictate national plans so the priorities of government are in line with that of the people. This is supposed to work in Ghana as well but it is not and so Ghana could learn from Sierra Leone. The following recommendations were made: 1. Capacity of CSOs should be enhanced to demand and promote social accountability 2. The guidelines at the districts should not be rigid they should allow districts to work at their priorities 3. There should be synergy between grass-root and national organizations 4. Civil society groups could be up scaled to use the score card method for social accountability

5. There should be a joint review to learn lessons and see opportunities for up scaling. Is there anyway that the APRM could be modified as an alternate tool for social accountability in the various countries. At the end it was agreed that proposals should be shared, capacity building initiatives should be long term and more networking through e-mails should be done. Francophone Countries Plan of Action The plan of action was identified as follows: Enhancing the capacity of Civil Society Organisations Promoting citizens control Institutionalising meeting and discussion between government and civil society organizations Mobilising resources and Follow up East Africa: Countries involved were Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya and Ethiopia and they identified their similarities as follows: Most governments have public expenditure tracking systems (PETS); Rights, responsibilities and Provisions are enshrined in constitutions of the various countries but actions of such bodies and commissions are not proactive and The Presence of Civil Society Groups engaged in social accountability.

One major difference was in their PRSP experiences in terms of participation, resources availability and capacity to implement the programme effectively. Opportunities Identified: Greater availability of resources at the local level; Need to use cultural traditions for education, poverty reduction, capacity building and enhance social accountability with the help of civil society and Need for coalition building with civil society organisations.

Conference Synthesis and Closing Session This session which was facilitated by Dr. Ahadzie and drew comments of appreciation, observations, lessons learnt and possible impact of the workshop by participants. Notable among them were George Matovu, Dr. Ahadzie, Reiner Forster, Mary McNeil, some donor partners and other participants from Benin and Burkina Faso. Some of these have been capture below as follows: George Matovu expressed appreciation to the World Bank and other sponsors of the conference. He stated that significant achievement of the conference included the mix of participants brought together and tools like PETS and scorecards that they have been exposed to. These constitute resources to be mobilized for effective SAc in Africa and each sub-region should have some resources to undertake minimum activity to implement action plans formulated. He assured participants that MDP had the will to continue its activities and would compile case studies in the different countries for capacity building. To him, the partnership fostered was an opportunity for participants to move together.

A participant from Benin congratulated the WB for the initiative and experiences shared. He believed that with the tools that they had been equipped and improvement in communication strategies, CSOs are ready to implement SAc in Africa in the interest of her people. In order to be effective, he implored CS actors to apply SAc to themselves and help transform the continent A participant from Burkina Faso acknowledged that the conference went well and would enable citizens to demand what they belongs to them. He reiterated that participation is the key to decentralization of local government and it is a requirement for effective and equitable development in our countries. He implored CSOs to conduct their activities in conformity with SAc principles in order to achieve desired results in their respective countries. David Korboe recounted his frustrations for not seeing results of development programmes/ activities in the lives of the people. On the basis of the stories heard from the participants, this conference had given him a ray of hope and also provided opportunity to start better networking in order to share ideas and experiences. He encouraged CS actors to be objective, review their tools thoroughly and document all the processes (objectives, tools and results) to facilitate effective learning. Anne Lugon-Moulin (Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation) She was encouraged because the motivation for SAc did come from donors. She stressed that the role of donors should be looked into critically. To her, the Cameroons campaign against frozen chicken importation and the lessons learnt was a classical example of how they could be effective. She called for creative tools in order to sustain the process and their ability to go through the mechanisms, especially traditional mechanisms for SAc. She stated SAc was a fight against corruption as well as prevention and detection of misappropriation of public funds. She indicated that the geographical distribution of the participants was a good demonstration. She concluded on the note that on their part as donors, they are accountable to their parliaments; and in her opinion, they should also be made accountable to the beneficiaries of the projects. She added that there was the need for harmonization of aid to facilitate citizens demand for accountability. Reiner Forster remarked that they had come a long way in instituting SAc in Africa it was no more at the incipient stage. The lessons obtained included improvement in tools by linking them to information infrastructure, i.e Freedom of Information Act. He emphasized the need to consider the interface between SAc and legal accountability. He identified the link between SAc and legal institutions as key to achieving effective results. WB has supported individual approaches in different countries through refinement of tools and capacity building; and it would continue to support knowledge management and networking to enhance knowledge sharing. Mary McNeil added that in the months to come, WBI would supporting the elaboration of Social Accountability case studies in Francophone African countries. She assured that presentations at the conferences and contact addresses of participants would be posted on the website to serve as resource for effective networking. Dr. Ahadzie believed that skills acquired would facilitate the creation of a movement of SAc in Africa. He therefore encouraged the participants to be resolute for there were challenges. He ended with a proverb indicating that the work must start from the bottom and scale up, because the only work that begins from the top is digging a hole.

He then declared the conference closed and wished participants a safe journey back to their respective countries.