Dear Colleagues
Transparency is sadly lacking in modern economic life ... though there is the appearance of information sharing, modern economic entities make only a very limited amount of information available for external use and scrutiny.
Transparency was popularized in the international arena when Transparency International was formed ... and the good news was that the word transparency became the subject of conferences, workshops and the like, but the bad news was that the talk was not matched by very much change in the way in which organizations operated.
One of the ongoing concerns is that the lack of transparency is not limited to just the corporate enterprise, or just a particular government, or just an institution like the World Bank, or the IMF or the UN ... but is a universal problem that is also common in the NGO community. Few organizations want to let others see very much at all about what they are doing. In the main organizations only make information available that they are required to by law, or which they consider to be useful for their public relations and promotion.
The consequences of this are significant. For instance: the public has no role in helping to hold economic organizations to account for the impact that organizations are having in any specific community. This can make a very big difference in the socio-economic situation in a community, and it is an aberation that a major economic actor in a community can effectively do whatever without very much accountability to the community. For instance: organizations are able to report very limited financial information, while at the same time publishing a lot of information about very little to give the impression of lots of worthwhile activity. This works well and helps with fund raising ... but it does not do anything to help get good allocation of resources and cost effective socio-economic progress.
There are emerging ways for the issue of transparency to be addressed so that the public can know much more of what it is reasonable the public should know. Small steps are being made, and the power of Internet knowledge is more and more coming into play. Tr-Ac-Net is playing a part in this, and will do more as time progresses.
Stay tuned
Peter Burgess
Showing posts with label Performance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Performance. Show all posts
Monday, December 17, 2007
Friday, December 14, 2007
Cost effective anti-malaria interventions
Dear Colleagues
Over the past five years there has been a major increase in the fund flows related to anti-malaria interventions. It is expected that in 2008, there will be more than $1 billion disbursed related to malaria work.
But it is interesting to note that the easy sound bite about child death ... "A child dies in Africa because of malaria every 30 seconds" ... or "some 3,000 children under 5 years of age die in Africa every day" remain the same now as they were two and three years ago. Is this lazyness on the part of the PR people ... or is this because the impact of the funding is insignificant.
With so much funding, it is reasonable to expect that there will be some cost accounting and performance analysis. President Bush made it clear that this was going to be a characteristic of the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) and everyone talks about the importance of performance metrics. But in reality, the presently available performance metrics are simplistic and merely confirm that certain activities have been carried out ... which is a start ... but there is little about how effective these activities are in addressing the burden of malaria.
What is the goal? To reduce the burden of malaria in the society.
What is the burden of malaria? There are many elements of which the following are important. How much cost does this have?
1... High mortality among young children
2... High mortality among pregnant women
3... Mortality among all other groups in the population
4... Morbidity among all groups in the population ... which has a big economic impact when working age adults are incapacitated
5... Lost working time due to malaria
6... Cost of anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
What are the key metrics that show progress and relate progress to the costs of the associated anti-malaria activities?
1... Reduction in mortality among young children
2... Reduction in mortality among pregnant women
3... Reduction in mortality among all other groups in the population
4... Reduction in morbidity among all groups in the population
5... Reduction in lost working time due to malaria
6... Reduction in the cost of needed anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
7... Reduction in the prevalence of malaria parasite in the human host
8... Reduction in the prevalence of malaria parasite in the mosquito population
9... No emergence of resistance in any of the anti-malaria interventions
10.. No environmental damage
11.. No negative side effects for the human population
What is the cost? What is the optimum cost? How to get the least cost and the most benefit for anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
...7... Cost of data collection, data logistics, data analysis and administration
The metrics described here are a lot more substantive than anything that seems to be available at the present time in the malaria sub-sector ... though there will be around $1 billion disbursed in 2008 to address the malaria component of African health.
The international relief and development sector does not have a good track record on financial control, cost accounting and related matters. The good news is that there is some discussion of the need for performance metrics. The bad news is that what currently goes for performance metrics is very limited in quality and comprehensiveness.
With limited performance metrics ... performance is compromised. The cost is huge. Good management information is possible. Good management information is used in the corporate sector, but good management information is almost entirely absent in the public sector, and especially in the international relief and development sector. This is obscene, and serves only those that want to rip off the system or are engaged in activities that have little or no value.
Your comments are welcome.
Peter Burgess
Over the past five years there has been a major increase in the fund flows related to anti-malaria interventions. It is expected that in 2008, there will be more than $1 billion disbursed related to malaria work.
But it is interesting to note that the easy sound bite about child death ... "A child dies in Africa because of malaria every 30 seconds" ... or "some 3,000 children under 5 years of age die in Africa every day" remain the same now as they were two and three years ago. Is this lazyness on the part of the PR people ... or is this because the impact of the funding is insignificant.
With so much funding, it is reasonable to expect that there will be some cost accounting and performance analysis. President Bush made it clear that this was going to be a characteristic of the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) and everyone talks about the importance of performance metrics. But in reality, the presently available performance metrics are simplistic and merely confirm that certain activities have been carried out ... which is a start ... but there is little about how effective these activities are in addressing the burden of malaria.
What is the goal? To reduce the burden of malaria in the society.
What is the burden of malaria? There are many elements of which the following are important. How much cost does this have?
1... High mortality among young children
2... High mortality among pregnant women
3... Mortality among all other groups in the population
4... Morbidity among all groups in the population ... which has a big economic impact when working age adults are incapacitated
5... Lost working time due to malaria
6... Cost of anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
What are the key metrics that show progress and relate progress to the costs of the associated anti-malaria activities?
1... Reduction in mortality among young children
2... Reduction in mortality among pregnant women
3... Reduction in mortality among all other groups in the population
4... Reduction in morbidity among all groups in the population
5... Reduction in lost working time due to malaria
6... Reduction in the cost of needed anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
7... Reduction in the prevalence of malaria parasite in the human host
8... Reduction in the prevalence of malaria parasite in the mosquito population
9... No emergence of resistance in any of the anti-malaria interventions
10.. No environmental damage
11.. No negative side effects for the human population
What is the cost? What is the optimum cost? How to get the least cost and the most benefit for anti-malaria interventions
...1... Medical care
...2... Personal protection (coils, sprays, etc)
...3... Personal protection (bednets)
...4... Interior residual spraying (IRS)
...5... Source control ... larvaciding
...6... Adult mosquito control ... ULV adulticiding
...7... Cost of data collection, data logistics, data analysis and administration
The metrics described here are a lot more substantive than anything that seems to be available at the present time in the malaria sub-sector ... though there will be around $1 billion disbursed in 2008 to address the malaria component of African health.
The international relief and development sector does not have a good track record on financial control, cost accounting and related matters. The good news is that there is some discussion of the need for performance metrics. The bad news is that what currently goes for performance metrics is very limited in quality and comprehensiveness.
With limited performance metrics ... performance is compromised. The cost is huge. Good management information is possible. Good management information is used in the corporate sector, but good management information is almost entirely absent in the public sector, and especially in the international relief and development sector. This is obscene, and serves only those that want to rip off the system or are engaged in activities that have little or no value.
Your comments are welcome.
Peter Burgess
Friday, December 7, 2007
Progress towards Millennium Development Goals
Dear Colleagues
In some cases there has been very good progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and in some cases not very much at all.
My own take on the MDGs is that they are more public relations than they are substance. They are typical of the modern era of established governance methodologies ... big on what is going to be done, but rather little to ensure that what is actually needed gets done.
In the year 2000, the UN makes committments to do big things by 2015. WOW! But who in the UN system is going to be around in fifteen years to explain anything. After five years a high profile and costly set of consultants reported on progress to date, and in simple terms, reported that progress was generally not very good at all. Progress in places like China and India with huge populations made the progress look better than it might have otherwise ... but in most places the relief and development sector and its leadership had made little or no progress. At the five year mark, the big recommendation was that issues like poverty could be addressed effectively by massive increases in the funding for the relief and development sector.
I respectfully disagree. There are two things that are needed. One is to make use of available resources in the best possible way. There needs to be very much improved accounting for resources, and especially there needs to be metrics about cost effectiveness. If the available money was used in the best possible way ... that is in the most cost effective way ... progress could be significantly accelerated.
When resources are being used well, then it is time to ask for more resources. At the moment the organizations involved in the relief and development sector either do not know much about the activities that are being funded and the results being achieved, or they are totally unwilling to share this information in a way that is useful.
Money is not the only resource that needs to be accounted for. There is also the human resource component. As things stand at the moment the human resource component is for all practical purposes ignored, and, not surprisingly, progress is not sustained. Imagine how much more could be done if local people were effectively mobilized as a resource for progress.
I see a lot wrong with the present system of relief and development assistance, but I do not see analysis of this. Instead I see a lot of thinking about how more money can be mobilized for something that really does not work.
Sincerely
Peter Burgess
The Tr-Ac-Net Organization
In some cases there has been very good progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and in some cases not very much at all.
My own take on the MDGs is that they are more public relations than they are substance. They are typical of the modern era of established governance methodologies ... big on what is going to be done, but rather little to ensure that what is actually needed gets done.
In the year 2000, the UN makes committments to do big things by 2015. WOW! But who in the UN system is going to be around in fifteen years to explain anything. After five years a high profile and costly set of consultants reported on progress to date, and in simple terms, reported that progress was generally not very good at all. Progress in places like China and India with huge populations made the progress look better than it might have otherwise ... but in most places the relief and development sector and its leadership had made little or no progress. At the five year mark, the big recommendation was that issues like poverty could be addressed effectively by massive increases in the funding for the relief and development sector.
I respectfully disagree. There are two things that are needed. One is to make use of available resources in the best possible way. There needs to be very much improved accounting for resources, and especially there needs to be metrics about cost effectiveness. If the available money was used in the best possible way ... that is in the most cost effective way ... progress could be significantly accelerated.
When resources are being used well, then it is time to ask for more resources. At the moment the organizations involved in the relief and development sector either do not know much about the activities that are being funded and the results being achieved, or they are totally unwilling to share this information in a way that is useful.
Money is not the only resource that needs to be accounted for. There is also the human resource component. As things stand at the moment the human resource component is for all practical purposes ignored, and, not surprisingly, progress is not sustained. Imagine how much more could be done if local people were effectively mobilized as a resource for progress.
I see a lot wrong with the present system of relief and development assistance, but I do not see analysis of this. Instead I see a lot of thinking about how more money can be mobilized for something that really does not work.
Sincerely
Peter Burgess
The Tr-Ac-Net Organization
Thursday, December 6, 2007
The new aid giants (7)
I thought Molly Tumusiime's message deserved a careful answer. This is my effort to answer the various points that she raised. MT indicates Molly Tumusiime's words ... PB is my response.
"Dear Colleagues
Most of the time, the feedback I get from Africa is relatively positive, and my colleagues in North America, Europe, etc are a little uncomfortable. This time Molly Tumusiime (MT) from Uganda is challenging me, and I owe her a decent response.
MT said: "I agree with the foregone concerns about accountability and transparency, they a good theoretical analogues that sometimes mask us from looking at real issues. Please don't take me wrong I love it if all factors are constant."
PB response: OK ... no disagreement up to this point
MT said: "Africa in particular has had a share of blame and counter blame over corruption and embezzlement of funds because the world does not see the continent look like the first world, but I always wonder if people try to weigh the magnitude of Africa's needs against the aid that is put in? "
PB response: There are two important issues here.
1 .... corruption and embezzlement is a serious source of poor performance in the relief and development context in Africa, but I would make the case that there is too much of this behavior everywhere in the world. The "buying" of favors in both the political world and in the business world is a global epidemic, and thought there is TALK about transparency and accountability to address the problem, the WALK is almost entirely missing EVERYWHERE. Accountability to the public is not something the establishment wants at all.
2 .... what exactly is Africa's need for aid? I have done my fair share of development planning in various parts of Africa and it is abundantly clear that there are huge resources in Africa, both natural and human ... and an absolutely ridiculous process of exploiting these resources so that Africa gets almost nothing from them. So then we find that ordinary Africans are poor, the governments are almost bankrupt and there is a huge need to get aid. The problem is that there is a very strong system in place that impoverishes ordinary Africans while others get wealthy. It is not a just arrangement ... and it needs work.
MT said: "Does the world ever sit to analyze and see how much ,even of that trillion my colleague is talking about below goes back to its owners in terms of technical assistance, posh cars, expensive hotels they sleep in while in Africa, boosting economies at hope by supporting the buying of things made in their countries, to the extent that when the technocrats go back home the cost of maintaining such things is a burden and subsequent waste."
PB's response: There have been a good number of books on this subject written over the past 20 years or so going back to Hansen's "Lord's of Poverty" in the 1980s. I have been outspoken on this issue for as long as I can remember ... I wrote some very critical material as long ago as 1979 on relief and development performance ... about a lot of overhead and not much results. My consulting career with the World Bank and the UN ended abruptly when I started following the money and asking about real results as opposed to merely real disbursements and costs.
PB more: I did some academic economics in the Keynesian model as a student, and I am disgusted at the World Bank and IMF thinking about how economics works in the African context. In my view, they have it about as wrong as they can. As I see it, Africa is a (real) market economy in the main, and NOT a monetary economy.
MT said: "May I suggest that Peter Burgess takes time off to scan through the moralistic side of Africa's aid before he fights how Africa should not get aid."
PB's response: I never suggested that Africa should not get more aid ... merely that it is more important for aid that is available and flowing to be used in Africa for work that benefits Africans and not to support the huge and growing overhead of the international relief and development system, and all the support organizations that are in a boom as donor disbursements expand.
PB more: The performance metric I want to see is community progress ... real people getting real value ... with modest amounts of external aid. When you look at how many people need aid, the number is huge and the aggregate anount of assistance needed is very large indeed. But more money merely for aid overhead is not my idea of a sensible strategy.
MT said: Let him conduct his research about the two questions he has raised (Meanwhile, there is little or no questioning of why it is that the previous $3 trillion (an imprecise number) has done so little, and how it is that these funds were ineffective.)
PB response: I think MT and I are not too far apart on our analysis of the situation. If anything, I might be even more aggressive for change. It is to be expected that we will differ on the detail ... but I don't think we are far apart on the basics.
MT said: I shall be interested to read his findings.
PB response: I hope this is sufficiently responsive.
Sincerely
Peter Burgess
____________
Peter Burgess
The Transparency and Accountability Network: Tr-Ac-Net in New York
www.tr-ac-net.org
IMMC - The Integrated Malaria Management Consortium Inc.
www.IMMConsortium.org
917 432 1191 or 212 772 6918 peterbnyc@gmail.com
"Dear Colleagues
Most of the time, the feedback I get from Africa is relatively positive, and my colleagues in North America, Europe, etc are a little uncomfortable. This time Molly Tumusiime (MT) from Uganda is challenging me, and I owe her a decent response.
MT said: "I agree with the foregone concerns about accountability and transparency, they a good theoretical analogues that sometimes mask us from looking at real issues. Please don't take me wrong I love it if all factors are constant."
PB response: OK ... no disagreement up to this point
MT said: "Africa in particular has had a share of blame and counter blame over corruption and embezzlement of funds because the world does not see the continent look like the first world, but I always wonder if people try to weigh the magnitude of Africa's needs against the aid that is put in? "
PB response: There are two important issues here.
1 .... corruption and embezzlement is a serious source of poor performance in the relief and development context in Africa, but I would make the case that there is too much of this behavior everywhere in the world. The "buying" of favors in both the political world and in the business world is a global epidemic, and thought there is TALK about transparency and accountability to address the problem, the WALK is almost entirely missing EVERYWHERE. Accountability to the public is not something the establishment wants at all.
2 .... what exactly is Africa's need for aid? I have done my fair share of development planning in various parts of Africa and it is abundantly clear that there are huge resources in Africa, both natural and human ... and an absolutely ridiculous process of exploiting these resources so that Africa gets almost nothing from them. So then we find that ordinary Africans are poor, the governments are almost bankrupt and there is a huge need to get aid. The problem is that there is a very strong system in place that impoverishes ordinary Africans while others get wealthy. It is not a just arrangement ... and it needs work.
MT said: "Does the world ever sit to analyze and see how much ,even of that trillion my colleague is talking about below goes back to its owners in terms of technical assistance, posh cars, expensive hotels they sleep in while in Africa, boosting economies at hope by supporting the buying of things made in their countries, to the extent that when the technocrats go back home the cost of maintaining such things is a burden and subsequent waste."
PB's response: There have been a good number of books on this subject written over the past 20 years or so going back to Hansen's "Lord's of Poverty" in the 1980s. I have been outspoken on this issue for as long as I can remember ... I wrote some very critical material as long ago as 1979 on relief and development performance ... about a lot of overhead and not much results. My consulting career with the World Bank and the UN ended abruptly when I started following the money and asking about real results as opposed to merely real disbursements and costs.
PB more: I did some academic economics in the Keynesian model as a student, and I am disgusted at the World Bank and IMF thinking about how economics works in the African context. In my view, they have it about as wrong as they can. As I see it, Africa is a (real) market economy in the main, and NOT a monetary economy.
MT said: "May I suggest that Peter Burgess takes time off to scan through the moralistic side of Africa's aid before he fights how Africa should not get aid."
PB's response: I never suggested that Africa should not get more aid ... merely that it is more important for aid that is available and flowing to be used in Africa for work that benefits Africans and not to support the huge and growing overhead of the international relief and development system, and all the support organizations that are in a boom as donor disbursements expand.
PB more: The performance metric I want to see is community progress ... real people getting real value ... with modest amounts of external aid. When you look at how many people need aid, the number is huge and the aggregate anount of assistance needed is very large indeed. But more money merely for aid overhead is not my idea of a sensible strategy.
MT said: Let him conduct his research about the two questions he has raised (Meanwhile, there is little or no questioning of why it is that the previous $3 trillion (an imprecise number) has done so little, and how it is that these funds were ineffective.)
PB response: I think MT and I are not too far apart on our analysis of the situation. If anything, I might be even more aggressive for change. It is to be expected that we will differ on the detail ... but I don't think we are far apart on the basics.
MT said: I shall be interested to read his findings.
PB response: I hope this is sufficiently responsive.
Sincerely
Peter Burgess
____________
Peter Burgess
The Transparency and Accountability Network: Tr-Ac-Net in New York
www.tr-ac-net.org
IMMC - The Integrated Malaria Management Consortium Inc.
www.IMMConsortium.org
917 432 1191 or 212 772 6918 peterbnyc@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
