1. 23-24 November 2016, Hanoi, Vietnam
Regional Consultation II on EFGR National Evaluation Policies and Systems in Asia
23-24 November 2016, Hanoi, Vietnam
Results Driven Accountability
COUNTRY PERPECTIVE: MALAYSIA
MOHD SAKERI ABDUL KADIR
Deputy Director
National Budget Office
Ministry of Finance Malaysia

2. Malaysia’s M&E Policies & Systems
Objektif
Malaysia’s M&E Policies & Systems
NEP is regulated by administrative circulars through development planning and budgetary processes
Summative evaluations are mandatory once in 5 years
Project evaluation (ICU): Conducted by agencies and periodic reports on progress, input utilization, gaps analysis and implementation issues
Program evaluation (MOF): Done either by internal evaluation teams (Internalised Self-Evaluation - ISE) or by external parties, i.e IHLs & RIs.
Adoption of the IRBM system should help further improve government’s development results across all priority areas within the medium term development framework
An integrated M&E system across govt. which cascades down from national to implementation levels is being developed -- OBB system 2
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia

3. Malaysia’s Budgetary Reform Initiatives
Objektif
Malaysia’s Budgetary Reform Initiatives
Trad.
PPBS
MBS
OBB
Integrated Approach
(2013 to date)
Accountability, Flexibility & Delegation ( )
Programmes & Performance ( )
Whole-of- govt. approach covering processes of complete cycle from planning to results
Integrated strategic results framework
Vertical and horizontal alignments
Performance monitoring and reporting
Evaluation
Detailed Controls & Discipline ( )
Disaggregated budget
Budget ceilings
Programme Agreements
Performance monitoring
Exceptions reporting
Evaluation
Programme performance
Programme- Activities struc.
Performance indicators
Evaluation
Incremental line item budgeting 3
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia

4. Manifestation of Evaluation in Malaysia’s Development Agenda
1. Demand side: Done on ad-hoc basis – however, managers must see evaluation as strategic reviews (PER, M&E etc)
2. Supply side: Need continuous capacity building and trainings,
3. Infrastructure: Ensure the framework/system yields the right type of data that can link the results chain and establish causality
Evaluation results are useful for:
Balance decision-making in planning, budgeting and resource appropriation processes -- strategy, financial, economics & social
Making adjustment and improvement in program development using new knowledge and alternative approaches
Institutional learning and management tool to improve program implementation -- lessons learnt, what works & what does not 4
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia

5. Challenges in Promoting EFGR Evaluation in Malaysia
Sees EFGR as a cross-cutting issue, identified as part of the 12 cross- cutting issue areas(1) under the IRBM system – i.e. Women & development
EFGR issue cuts across many priority areas and needs concerted and coordinated interventions
Gender represents as a group of clients and is given focus/ priority where required in that particular program.
When articulating our program theory using the ProLL model, we look through the lens of the client and stakeholder needs and problems.
Still many issues need to be addressed, among others:
Understanding the concept of EFGR and how it relates to national agendas and down to implementation level
Establishing clear link between Malaysia’s outcome based approach using IRBM to addressing the EFGR issues
Strengthening the roles and capacities of ministries 5
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia
(1) © 2007 Arunaselam Rasappan, "Fundamentals of Integrated Results Based Management System", Working Paper, CeDRE International, Malaysia"
dr aru

6. IRBM: Implementation Structure for Public Sector
Parliament/
Cabinet Ministers
Budget/performance reporting
National Development Planning Committee (NDPC)
Sec. Gen. & HOD Meeting
National OBB Steering Committee (NOSC)
Performance reporting
Programme Rationalisation Committee (PRC)
Central Performance Management Committee (CPMC)
Policy, implementation & improvement on OBB
Budget screening/ performance reporting
Programme Rationalisation/ new activities creation
Planning for Outcome
Budgeting for Outcome
Programme Implementation
Monitoring & Evaluation
Performance Reporting/ Policy Formulation
Ministry OBB Implementation Committee (MOIC)
Programme Performance Management Committee (PPMC)
ISE: Programme evaluation carried out by respective agencies
Activity Performance Management Committee (APMC) 6
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia

7. Objektif
Way Forward
Close collaboration with external parties -- UNICEF, ADB, WB, IMF, MES -- to share experiences and promote the evaluation agenda
Establish systematic M&E Framework -- i.e. for Public Sector
Comprehensive and systematic e-enabled MIS -- MyResults
Integrated public sector performance management
RF & performance info -- Program objectives, outcome, output generation, resources utilisation, activity completion etc – for evaluation
Standard data framework structures for M&E – to conduct ISE
The whole-of-government approach and the IRBM principles under OBB supported by structured M&E framework will contribute to the continuous improvement in the public services performance.
All parties have roles in promoting the evaluation agenda -- public sector, private sector and volunteer organization of professional evaluation (VOPE) 7
Mohd Sakeri Abdul Kadir
National Budget Office, Malaysia

8. Regional Consultation II on EFGR National Evaluation Policies and Systems in Asia
23-24 November 2016, Hanoi, Vietnam
TERIMA KASIH
THANK YOU
MOHD SAKERI ABDUL KADIR
Deputy Director
National Budget Office
Ministry of Finance Malaysia