IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutional analysis of monitoring and evaluation systems : comparing M&E systems in Ugandas health and education sector


  • Holvoet, Nathalie
  • Inberg, Liesbeth
  • Sekirime, Susan


In the context of the Paris Declaration and sector wide approaches (SWAps), the need to invest in well-functioning national health sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems is widely acknowledged. Regardless of the approach adopted, an important first step in any strategy for capacity development is to diagnose the quality of existing systems or arrangements, taking into account both the supply and demand sides of M&E. As no standardized M&E diagnostic instrument currently exists, we invested in the development of an assessment tool for sector M&E systems. In order to counter the criticism that M&E is often narrowed down to a focus on technicalities, our diagnostic tool assesses the quality of M&E systems according to six dimensions: i) policy; ii) indicators, data collection and methodology; iii) organisation (further divided into iiia: structure, and iiib: linkages); iv) capacity; v) participation of non-government actors; and vi) use of M&E outputs. We have applied this checklist to M&E arrangements in e.g. the education and health sectors of Uganda. The outcomes of these two assessments are compared in this paper. As we aim to explore the underlying institutions and contextual factors that influence M&E in Uganda, and more specifically M&E in the education and health sectors, we draw upon the insights from the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework to structure our analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Holvoet, Nathalie & Inberg, Liesbeth & Sekirime, Susan, 2013. "Institutional analysis of monitoring and evaluation systems : comparing M&E systems in Ugandas health and education sector," IOB Working Papers 2013.03, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
  • Handle: RePEc:iob:wpaper:2013003

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Nazmul Chaudhury & Jeffrey Hammer & Michael Kremer & Karthik Muralidharan & F. Halsey Rogers, 2006. "Missing in Action: Teacher and Health Worker Absence in Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 91-116, Winter.
    2. Holvoet, N. & Renard, Robrecht, 2007. "Monitoring and evaluation under the PRSP: Solid rock or quicksand?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 66-81, February.
    3. Reinikka, Ritva & Svensson, Jakob, 2011. "The power of information in public services: Evidence from education in Uganda," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 956-966, August.
    4. Holvoet, Nathalie & Rombouts, Heidy, 2008. "The denial of politics in PRSP’s monitoring and evaluation: experiences from Rwanda," IOB Discussion Papers 2008.02, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    5. Frederick Golooba-Mutebi, 2005. "When Popular Participation Won't Improve Service Provision: Primary Health Care in Uganda," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 23(2), pages 165-182, March.
    6. Keith Mackay, 2007. "How to Build M&E Systems to Support Better Government," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6851, July.
    7. Ritva Reinikka & Jakob Svensson, 2005. "Fighting Corruption to Improve Schooling: Evidence from a Newspaper Campaign in Uganda," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 259-267, 04/05.
    8. Holvoet, Nathalie & Inberg, Liesbeth, 2011. "Sector monitoring and evaluation systems in the context of changing aid modalities: the case of Niger‘s health sector," IOB Working Papers 2011.02, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Uganda; monitoring and evaluation; health; education;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iob:wpaper:2013003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Hans De Backer). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.