PER/GBS/MKUKUTA Main Working Group

Discussions on the MKUKUTA Review

15September2009

Key Summary of Agreements

Note by DPG Secretariat

The note summarizes key discussions and agreementsduring the PER/GBS/MKUKUTA Main Working Group for the purpose of providing quick updates to DPG members on the MKUKUTA review.Detailed Updates on the MKUKUTA Review process are included in the Update document circulated by the MKUKUTA Secretariat during the meeting. Formal minutes will be prepared by the PER/MKUKUTASecretariat.

PER/GBS/MKUKUTA Main Working Group was convened to discuss progress and a way forward on the MKUKUTA review. The meeting was chaired by Dr. Mpango.

Summary of Discussions:

Key Update:

  • Analytical Studies: Whilst delays were experienced due to slow process/progress in terms of the finalization of ToRs, short listing/selection of consultants, etc. dozens of studies have been already commissioned, and additional 14 studies had been sent to the Ministerial Tender Board. Some studies had also been undertaken within the sector review process.
  • Financing Studies: With the pledge communicated to the MoFEA, currently there is no funding gap. However, there is a need to speed up the process of firming up agreements in order to timely disburse funds for studies.
  • Drafting Process: Whilst a number of analytical studies are on-going and to be further commissioned, a drafting process was initiated, starting with a development of a Concept Note for the next MKUKUTA, and literature reviews of already available documents and literature, including draft PHDR 2009 and PHDR 2005, 2007, and MDG reports. The MKUKUTA Annual Implementation Report (MAIR) also provides further inputs into the drafting process. Those documents provide basis for overall assessment of MKUKUTA implementation. Some of the expected outputs include:
  • Concept Note on the design of MKUKUTA II
  • Annotated Outline
  • First draft of the MKUKUTA II – expected by the end of December.
  • Drafting Team: The drafting team which was inaugurated in late August includes experts with relevant expertise and experience. Every chapter will have lead experts. Whilst a core team of drafting team will continue its work throughout the drafting process, the team will also seek necessary and relevant expertise.
  • Consultative Process: The MKUKUTA Secretariat is currently finalizing a Consultation Guide, which had been shared with CSOs. Further discussion is on-going with regard to the CSO and non-state actors’ engagement in this process, including effective CSO engagement at Cluster and sector dialogue.

Key Summary of Discussions and Agreements:

  • Studies: Cost-sharing agreements between individual DPs and UNDP to channel funds through the DPG Secretariat in order to support analytical studies of the MKUKUTA review need to be finalized by 1st October 2009.
  • It was agreed to drop the following three studies:

-1B1: FDIs and Promotion of Agriculture as a Mechanism for Enhancing Pro-poor Growth.

-3B2: The extent to which institutional factors facilitated or inhibited poverty reduction efforts.

-4C1: Accountability and value for money (planning, budgeting and expenditure) are related to MKUKUTA and MKUZA objectives.

  • Consultants will be requested to give an executive summary of key findings, in which they give strategic advice for the development of MKUKUTA II. This task will be included in ToRs as an addendum. This is considered as essential to facilitate digesting outcomes and recommendations to better feed into a drafting process.
  • Communication: It was seen as crucial to improve the communication between GoT and DPs. In order to enhance the information flow, key developments in the MKUKUTA Review (new information regarding studies, meetings etc.) will be provided by the MKUKUTA Secretariat every Monday and will be posted on the DPG website as well as the Poverty Monitoring website (
  • Assessment vs. drafting: It was raised that it was not clear as to how the review process links into the drafting process, when drafting is initiated whilst a number of studies are still on-going. Particularly, the clear framework was noted to be essential as to how those outcomes of review/assessment will be discussed and how these discussions will relate to drafting process. In this context, it was noted that besides a number of analytical studies undertaken in the context of the MKUKUTA review, other processes and outputs also inform the drafting process. Those include: PER, GBS Annual Review particularly with regard to the Performance Assessment Framework and products coming out from the MKUKUTA Monitoring System, including PHDR, MDG Report, and MAIR. To this end, the importance of starting dialogue on substance was noted, starting with those already available documents through either PER/MKUKUTA Main WG or Joint Coordination Group meeting, leading up to the National Annual Policy Review which would also provide an opportunity for substantive dialogue on assessment and overall policy guidance/strategy.
  • Policy Guidance: DPs noted on the significance of the strategic thinking process on overall policy directions/guidance, which would guide elaboration of the next strategy. For example, as highlighted in recent dialogue on the population dynamic study, the issue on population requires strategic policy directions to inform strategy on population. Such guidance requires higher-level strategic process.
  • In this regard and substantive dialogue on strategic guidance/directions, Cluster leads will be instructed to report on issues, which need higher level attention and policy guidance (e.g. population dynamics), to the PER/GBS/MKUKUTA Main WG. The PER/GBS/MKUKUTA Main WG will then decide where the issue will be discussed (e.g. at the Joint Coordination Group, Development Cooperation Forum, political level dialogue, etc.).
  • The importance of the Government to come up with overall policy guidance was acknowledged. Whilst overall direction is clear with regard to the need for a sharper and focused strategy, Got will reflect internally with regard to the overall policy guidance.
  • Quality assurance: The importance of quality assurance was emphasized. In addressing this, it was agreed that Cluster WGs will identify a small peer review teams, which will consist of Cluster Got, DPs and CSO representatives.
  • Further discussions are needed regarding possible actions in case studies lack quality. One possibility would be to request consultants to include comments given by stakeholders, regardless of time shortage. Another possibility would be to engage other consultants to fill in the gaps.

Timeline: In order to ensure that findings of the review process feed into the drafting of MKUKUTA II, the importance of a clear timelineand comprehensive plan of actionswith clear timeline for each study, and clear work programme for drafting and consultationwas stressed.

  • Drafting: A Concept Note on the design of MKUKUTA II has been prepared and will soon be shared with DPs. It was agreed that the discussion on substance needs to start immediately. Forums will be arranged to discuss available documents, e.g. the Concept Note and studies undertakenby RAWG.

DPG Secretariat, 15 September 2009.

1