Strengthening RBM implementation- Vietnam practice

1. Strengthening RBM implementation- Vietnam practice

2. Incentives for RBM • Commitment from the high leadership: • The Government join the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness • The Hanoi Core Statement was endorsed by the Prime Minister of Vietnam in September 2005; • MDGs and VDGs • CPRGS (approved by the Prime Minister in 2002) • Commitment to carry out planning and financial management reforms (under PRSC) to link planning and budgeting.

3. Incentives for RBM • The Hanoi Core Statement includes partnership commitments by the Government and donors in Vietnam for: • Alignment to the Government policy and system; • Harmonisation and simplification; • Managing for results; and • Mutual accountability.

4. Incentives for RBM • The Government of Vietnam and donors commit to use results-oriented frameworks to maximize aid effectiveness and manage implementation of the new 5 year social and economic development plan (SEDP): • The government has tried to develop the M&E framework for the 2006-2010 SEDP; The M&E framework is to be sent to the PM in early August; • The donors have tried to prepare the results-based country programming and strategy in consistency with the government SEDP (New ADB’s CPS, WB’s CAP); • ODA funds release is based on the portfolio performance. VAMES project is helping to introduce the project M&E system (M&E framework, indicators, guidelines, software data collection and reporting system…)

5. Incentives for RBM • Decentralization in state management • Resolution No. 08/2004/NQCP issued on 30th June 2004 by the PM on further speeding up of state management decentralization to city and provincial’ authorities • Law on State Budget (2002), Law on Investment (2006) delegates the budget allocation and investment management responsibilities and rights to provincial/sectoral and local levels. • Communes are delegated the responsibilities and rights of the investment owner under various national targeting programs (e.g. 135, HEPR)

6. Incentives for RBM • New aids instruments introduced (BS, SBS, SWAPs) by donors require more transparency, accountability and decentralization in management of public resources  Establish appropriate M&E system at project, program and sector levels and promote the requirement for auditing to all public projects; • One year piloting of BS to the 135 program (USD 10 millions from DFID); • Piloting BS approach in 2 provinces under the Rural Transport 3 project (DFID); • TBS in education sector for “Education for All” national targeting program (WB and other donors)

7. Incentives for RBM • Clarity of expected results: • 2006-2010 SEDP prepared in wide consultation with communities, donors and NGOs objectives become more clear and agreed between all stakeholders although the objectives in the SEDP haven’t been still structured by priorities and in close link to the programs; • The government has been making efforts to develop clear criteria on the allocation of investment resources from the state budget;

8. Capacity issues • Technical capacity: • ADB and WB are helping MPI to develop the 2006-2010 SEDP monitoring and evaluating framework; • UNDP is helping GSO to develop tools and instruments for performance measurement • EU is helping to build the data analysis capacity for MOF, NA, MPI and MOET • Lack of equipment (computers, internet facilities…) in many provinces and agencies the Government approved the National Program on IT and Modernization of Administrative system in 2005 to improve the technical capacity for government agencies. USD 30 millions were borrowed from ADB to equip computers and software for administrative agencies at all levels;

9. Capacity issues • Organizational capacity: • The government has started (2006) the amendment of the Law on Government Organization to make the role and responsibilities of the government agencies more clear; The draft is planned to be submitted to the NA in October; • The “Bloc grant” for funding administrative agencies has been applied as the pilot in Ho Chi Minh city and now the government has decided to expand this modality to all other provinces (2006); Decisions 130 for administrative agencies and Decision 43 for the State income-generating agencies issued in 2006 give full financial management autonomy to them; • MTEF has been piloting in 4 provinces and 4 ministries and planed to be scaled out through the country after 2008.

10. Capacity issues • Behavior capacity: • Recruitment and promotion hasn’t been by merit; • Weak policy making capacity; • Not results- based decisions making process; • Poor information sharing practice; • No job description in many agencies causes in lack of clarity in responsibilities and mandates of government staff • Lack of staff performance assessment system.

11. Capacity issues • Key Government/National Assembly measures: • Amended Law on Government Organization (2007?) • Enhancing PAR • Anti- corruption Law issued and effective in 2005; • Law on Procurement in 2005; • Amended Law on Complaints and Denunciations (2003); • Law on Inspection (2004) • The State Audit Office became independent (November 2004) • Ordinance on State Audit