Monitoring and evaluation of policy implementation

A guideline on policy evaluation is available

The guideline should contain instructions and good practices on how to initiate, plan and conduct policy evaluations or ex-post impact assessments.

The authority for providing guidance and support during policy evaluation exists

The organisational set-up and responsibilities of public administration are assessed to identify if there is a dedicated institution responsible for co-ordinating the government’s approach to evaluation and for providing guidance and support to ministries to plan and conduct the evaluation of policies. This can involve implementation of an ex-post impact assessment system which is linked with the ex-ante impact assessment.

There are criteria in place to identify policies for which evaluations would be carried out

The criteria for identifying the policies for evaluations are established in legislation or guidance documents. Criteria can include for example: importance of the objectives; significance of the effects; problems and issues with application.

Preparation of evaluation reports in practice

Administrations are asked to confirm the practice of conducting evaluations of policies by providing evidence of at least three policy evaluations having been completed during the last full calendar year. Examples of evaluation reports on implementation of strategic and policy documents and laws can be considered, both interim and ex-post. The evaluation must be led by the responsible ministry/government institution but may involve external stakeholders and experts. Evaluation reports must be publicly available. SIGMA does not consider evaluation reports conducted on PAR or PFM reform programme. Independent evaluations conducted by external stakeholders (e.g. non-governmental organisations [NGO], international organisations, donors, etc.) are not considered in the assessment unless those were commissioned by the lead institution.

The work plan of the ministry contains specific objectives and measurable targets

Results are taken from the assessment in the Organisation, accountability and oversight area, Sub-indicator 13.1.4. Strength of the accountability framework for promoting performance, Criterion 1. Review of practices of three ministries (responsible for finance, economy, and social affairs). The work plan needs to be approved by the minister and to be publicly available. The annual report (or any other document for informing the public about achievements) needs to contain information on the predefined objectives and targets and to be publicly available. 1 point is awarded for each ministry that meets the requirement.

The last annual report of the ministry contained information against predefined objectives and targets

Results are taken from the assessment in the Organisation, accountability and oversight area, Sub-indicator 13.1.4. Strength of the accountability framework for promoting performance, Criterion 1. Review of practices of three ministries (responsible for finance, economy, and social affairs). The work plan needs to be approved by the minister and to be publicly available. The annual report (or any other document for informing the public about achievements) needs to contain information on the predefined objectives and targets and to be publicly available. 3 points are awarded for each ministry that meets the requirement.