1. V Konferencja Ewaluacyjna Warszawa, 23.10.2009 Peter van der Knaap Ewaluacja w procesie budżetowania zadaniowego – doświadczenia holenderskie

2. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 2 Evaluations for a cost-effective and responsive government Experiences from The Netherlands Peter van der Knaap, PhD. Director, Netherlands Court of Audit

3. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 3 Outline 1. Introduction: performance based budgeting and evaluation in The Netherlands 2. Regulations and management 3. Results and challenges 4. Outlook: next steps

4. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 4 16,5 million inh. decentralised unitary state State expenditure 272 billion Euro (income: 240) top 10 TI index christian-social democratic coalition old ties with Poland Holland

5. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 5 I. Performance based budgetting in The Netherlands 1999: ‘From policy budgetting to policy accountability’ Objectives and indicators plus evaluation Initiative: Parliament!

6. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 6

7. 7 Structure of Budgets and Annual Accounts To be answered by Governments’s budget: What do we want to achieve? What will we do to achieve it? What will be the costs? To be answered by Annual Report: Did we achieve what we wanted to achieve? Did we do what we promised to do? Did it cost what we estimated?

8. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 8 Scores for “Accountability Day”

9. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 9 Minister Agencies Parliament NCA MAD Auditor IC II. The formal audit and evaluation system - ministers = responsible - 5 year (6, 7…) - ‘adding up’ evaluations: objectives ↑ instruments

10. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 10 Levels of evaluation Policy auditsMinistries / Ministry of Finance General policy objectives (line items) Policy evaluationsMinistries (Evaluation / Audit department) Operational policy objectives (line item subdivisions) Evaluation of policy instruments Ministries (policy units / agencies) Policy instruments

11. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 11 Evaluation quality: requirements and management Standards and guidelines: process transparancy and checks Professionalism and education (State Finance Academy) Exchange / Pool / Central Audit Directorate Evaluation of evaluation quality Peer reviews (NCA)

12. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 12 Results? ☺Political debate, cabinet priorities, media attention ☺Focus in monitoring systems, ex ante and ex post evaluation ! Bureaucracy, data dumping and perception of “audit tower” ! Negative effects: tunnel vision, rigidity, strategies ! No real adding-up evaluations ! Questions concerning quality

13. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 13

14. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 14

15. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 15

16. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 16

17. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 17 Results? ☺Political debate, cabinet priorities, media attention ☺Focus in monitoring systems, ex ante and ex post evaluation ! Bureaucracy, data dumping and perception of “audit tower” ! Negative effects: tunnel vision, rigidity, strategies ! No real adding-up evaluations ! Questions concerning quality

18. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 18

19. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 19

20. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 20

21. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 21

22. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 22 Next steps: Quality: indepence and transparancy Reporting Keeping it managable: adding up and sizing down! Responsivenes: citizen centered evaluations “Accountable for learning”

23. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 23

24. V Evaluation Conference, Warsaw 2009 24 Thank you! peter.vanderknaap@rekenkamer.nl