## _032108a

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [_032108a](https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2008/_032108a.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2008/_032108a.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2008/_032108a.pdf.json)

---

### Executive summary: project scope and objectives
- Phase I of the Anglophone African (AAf) GDDS project covered 15 Anglophone African countries and ran during 2001–2006.
- Funded by the U.K. Department for International Development (DFID) and executed jointly by the IMF (Statistics Department, STA) and the World Bank.
- Immediate goal: assist participating countries to join the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and prepare metadata and plans for improvement.
- Broader goals: build national capacity to compile and disseminate data, strengthen governance and decision-making through timely and transparent dissemination of high quality data, and promote greater awareness and regional cooperation.
- Countries included: Botswana, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

### Key outcomes and achievements
- Participation and GDDS use
  - 14 out of the 15 countries participating in the project became participants in the GDDS.
  - The GDDS framework guided progress in metadata preparation, plans for improvement, and dissemination.
- Concrete outputs (selected)
  - Sectoral and country-specific outputs documented (examples across 2002–2006 include BOP, GFS, CPI rebasing, PPI launch, integrated monetary databases, revised BOP series, household and industry surveys).
  - Country highlights by year: 2002 (Malawi work plans; Namibia new data sources), 2003 (Botswana quarterly BOP tables; Kenya GFS compilation), 2004 (Botswana and Lesotho bridge tables to GFSM 2001), 2005 (Botswana Integrated Monetary Database; Zambia chart of accounts based on GFSM 2001), 2006 (Ghana PPI progress and GFS tables; Liberia CPI with new weights; Malawi IIP data compiled).
- STA capacity and TA delivery
  - DFID financing enabled STA to augment resources and substantially expand TA available to support Africa and the AAf countries.
  - Flexible budgetary arrangements allowed STA to incorporate project activities into its work program while using its own administrative and accounting practices.
  - TAIMS coverage was extended to the project; information indicates TA was broadly effective.
  - Project lowered “transactions costs” for recipient countries via a common regional advisor, joint workshops, and a common GDDS framework.
- Coordination and integration
  - Enhanced coordination between IMF, World Bank, and regional TA providers.
  - STA led implementation of Fund-wide recommendations on TA provision and intensified support for MAPS and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
  - Project experience informed adjustments incorporated into STA’s TA program and Phase II design.

### Project management, financing, and responsibilities
- IMF (through STA): responsible for overall GDDS and macroeconomic statistics issues; administrative aspects of joint project operations; responsibility for the regional advisor. Combined STA cost: US$5.1 million.
- World Bank: responsible for the socio-demographic statistical aspect.
- DFID provided bulk of financing; Fund and Bank provided headquarters support and coordination of TA extended to 14 (eventually 15) participating countries.
- Fund and Bank projects merged in May 2004 (Combined total of US$8.6 millions).
- Under Phase I, Fund staff travel costs were not covered by the project; bilateral Fund-specialized TA over 2002–2006 delivered entirely by outside experts; STA staff provided backstopping (supervision) and participated in certain workshops and regional events.

### TA delivery: missions, topics, and methods
- Mission totals (Phase I)
  - Total missions in Phase I: 281 missions.
  - IMF missions: 189.
  - World Bank missions: 92.
  - Topical TA missions: 233.
  - Workshops and regional conferences: 48.
- IMF mission topical decomposition (IMF missions = 189)
  - External: 33
  - Fiscal: 35
  - Monetary/Financial: 15
  - National Accounts: 30
  - Prices: 15
  - GDDS and Planning: 40
  - Workshop and Presentation at Conferences: 21
- Country-level mission counts (selected)
  - Sierra Leone: Total 20 missions.
  - Swaziland: Total 24 missions.
  - Botswana and Namibia: each 14 missions recorded.
  - Most participating AAf countries received between 10 and 20 missions each; outliers include Eritrea and Nigeria.
- TA delivery characteristics
  - TA based on “Areas in Need of Improvement” identified in GDDS metadata.
  - Bank TA usually provided in a single visit or one follow-up mission; Fund TA typically delivered in a series of three or four missions.
  - Fund began with four dedicated experts and broadened the expert pool to more than 30 individuals.
  - Fund TA provided with professional supervision (backstopping) by topical divisions; numerical ratings used by experts for extent of task accomplishment.

### Monitoring, evaluation, and TAIMS
- TAIMS adopted formally by STA and other TA departments in May 2005 to improve TA management, monitoring, evaluation, and information sharing.
- TAIMS covers the TA project cycle and includes four reports: Project Framework Summary (PFS), Statement of Mission Tasks (SMT), End-of-Mission Assessment Report (EMAR), and Project Evaluation Report (PER).
  - SMT and EMAR prepared for each TA mission.
  - PFS and PER prepared for a country at the beginning and end of a project; PERs generally prepared about a year after project completion to assess sustainability.
- The PFS sets objectives, outputs, verifiable indicators, expected completion dates, and risks/assumptions and is updated during the project.

### Country case reviews and PER findings (Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone)
- Coverage and inputs
  - The three countries received a total of 29 TA missions in macroeconomic topical areas, constituting eight projects with inputs ranging from a single mission up to five missions per project.
  - A total of five PERs have been prepared for these country projects.
- Common findings
  - Project ratings largely “Largely achieved” across several objectives.
  - Compilers’ surveys indicated weaknesses particularly in data provision to IMF, donor coordination, and data dissemination.
  - Authorities often reported improved data quality, but scope of data still limited.
  - Staff emphasized need for follow-up with data providers and regular upgrading of skills.
- STA responses to TA delivery problems (post-June 2007 internal review)
  - Terminated services of three external experts involved in coordination/completion problems.
  - Hired an expert to complete TA reports and sent follow-up missions to address underlying coordination and funding issues.
  - Donors expedited action to enhance coordination among themselves and with local agencies.

### Lessons learned and programmatic changes
- Process orientation and sequencing
  - Phase I initially focused on GDDS participation and preparatory advocacy; emphasis later shifted to TA delivery to implement plans for improvement.
  - Central theme: promote national ownership of capacity-building efforts.
- Value of regional and modular approaches
  - Regional approach useful for experience sharing and peer pressure.
  - Effectiveness enhanced when TA focused on small groups of countries with similar capacity needs.
  - Phase II adopted a modular, multicountry platform reflecting Phase I lessons.
- STA integration and additionality
  - AAf project and AFRITAC funding accounted for almost one third of STA missions to Africa by 2003 and roughly three quarters by 2008.
  - Almost all increase in STA’s TA missions to Africa since 2002 (some 170 additional missions) was supported by the AAf project (67) and the AFRITACs (87).
  - Missions funded from these resources were fully integrated in STA day-to-day operations and produced extensive documentation and evaluation tools.

### Phase II design changes informed by Phase I
- Timeframe: extends over three years, 2006–2009.
- Format changes
  - Emphasis on multi-country collaboration and assistance.
  - Workshops and meetings built around substantive “modules” rather than single-country TA.
- Administrative/delivery adjustments
  - Allow staff travel costs to be covered on a limited basis by the project to enhance field supervision and evaluation of TA.
  - Allow STA to contract for headquarters-based module managers to ease administrative burden and backstopping responsibilities.
- Module structure and topical focus
  - Limited number of modules—eight for the Fund and seven for the Bank—run by module managers.
  - Five topical TA modules for STA: monetary and financial (two parallel modules), balance of payments, government finance, and national accounts statistics.
  - GDDS/PRSP module: mainstreaming statistics in PRSPs and creating national summary data pages (NSDPs).
  - SACU module: harmonization of customs data compilation across SACU members.
  - SDDS module: support for graduation to SDDS.

### Sustainability and longer-term issues
- Progress and risks
  - Many participating countries made concrete progress in statistical description, output, quality, and dissemination.
  - Longer-term sustainability of capacity gains is not assured due to the long-term nature of capacity building and insufficient national priority and funding for statistical reforms.
- Efforts to strengthen sustainability
  - Linking GDDS work to the poverty reduction strategy approach to secure medium-to long-term funding.
  - Promoting regional cooperation and peer pressure mechanisms.
  - Encouraging countries to graduate to the SDDS for sustained compilation and dissemination monitoring.
- Key resource and system requirements for sustainability
  - Adequate skilled staff, regular training, and competitive remuneration.
  - Regular surveys/censuses and maintenance of administrative data systems as source data.
  - Equipment for transport and IT systems, appropriate office space and power supply, with regular maintenance and upgrades.
  - Adequate national budget and donor resources across all components of the statistical system.
- Indicators of concern
  - Some countries slipping from adherence to GDDS norms, such as regular updating and submission of metadata.
  - Phase I process orientation left GDDS less focused on data outputs; Phase II intensifies pilots to directly promote data dissemination and accountability.

### Participant views, workshops, and south-to-south learning (Box 4 highlights)
- Perceived achievements
  - Agencies better understand and identify gaps in data series and methodologies; many reported improved time lags and coverage.
- Maintenance and fragility
  - Several representatives believed agencies could maintain current quality but stressed continued fragility and need for improvements (“not there yet”).
  - Fragility factors: staff training and turnover, software problems, data not ready for publication, outstanding gaps.
- Awareness workshops and costs
  - Workshops usually one-day events attracting between 50 and 200 participants.
  - Typical project contribution per workshop: about $3,000–$4,000.
- Regional events and study tours
  - Sub-regional seminars and study tours rated very effective; south-to-south technical assistance extended project reach.
- Cooperation with World Bank
  - Fund and World Bank cooperation increased significantly; components merged in May 2004 facilitating integrated activities and joint reporting.

### Key statistics on STA TA missions (calendar-year basis)
- All TA missions to AFR:
  - 2000: 32
  - 2001: 36
  - 2002: 36
  - 2003: 99
  - 2006: 115
  - 2007: 142
  - 2008 (Est.): 209
- Of which funded by DFID:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 4
  - 2003: 31
  - 2006: 54
  - 2007: 35
  - 2008 (Est.): 67
- Of which funded by AFRITAC:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0
  - 2003: 1
  - 2006: 19
  - 2007: 53
  - 2008 (Est.): 87
- Person years funded by DFID:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0.73
  - 2003: 2.48
  - 2006: 4.98
  - 2007: 3.03
  - 2008 (Est.): 6.26
- Person years funded by AFRITAC:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0
  - 2003: 0.43
  - 2006: 2.41
  - 2007: 2.93
  - 2008 (Est.): 4.55

### Recommendations and priority actions (drawn from reviews)
- Rearticulate the role of the GDDS regional advisor and support national GDDS coordinators within Phase II’s modular approach.
- Sustain cross-government working, intercountry networking, and knowledge sharing under Phase II modules.
- Support countries to make annual updates to metadata, log changes, post metadata on national websites, and link to the IMF website; encourage documentation of progress against plans for improvement.
- Continue to strengthen local consultancy capacity.
- Ensure realism of country plans and linkage between metadata, plans for improvement, and National Strategies for the Development of Statistics (NSDSs); monitor whether GDDS TA recommendations are implemented.
- Undertake risk assessment and mitigation planning to increase sustainability of capacity-building efforts and contribution to purpose-level objectives.
- Address TA backstopping pressures via module managers and limited staff travel coverage to improve supervision and evaluation.

_Italic: Source: Executive Summary and sections 9, 33, 52, and Box 4 from AAf Project Phase I (2001–2006), IMF Statistics Department (STA), content unit _032108a.__

### Executive Summary ......................................................................................................

### Executive Summary

### Project scope and objectives
- Phase I of the Anglophone African (AAf) GDDS project covered 15 Anglophone African countries and ran during 2001–2006.
- The project was funded by the U.K. Department for International Development (DFID) and executed jointly by the IMF (Statistics Department, STA) and the World Bank.
- Immediate goal: assist participating countries to join the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and prepare metadata and plans for improvement.
- Broader goals: build national capacity to compile and disseminate data, strengthen governance and decision-making through timely and transparent dissemination of high quality data, and promote greater awareness and regional cooperation.
- Countries included: Botswana, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

### Key outcomes and achievements
- Participation and use of the GDDS framework:
  - 14 out of the 15 countries participating in the project became participants in the GDDS.
  - The GDDS framework was used to guide progress in improving statistical systems (metadata preparation, plans for improvement, and dissemination).
- Concrete outputs:
  - Country-by-country examination revealed a number of concrete outputs in targeted sectors (see Appendix references in source).
- STA capacity and TA delivery:
  - DFID financing enabled STA to augment resources and substantially expand TA available to support Africa and the AAf countries.
  - Flexible budgetary arrangements allowed STA to incorporate project activities into its work program while using its own administrative and accounting practices.
  - TAIMS coverage was extended to the project; information from project evaluation reports indicates TA was broadly effective.
  - The project lowered “transactions costs” for recipient countries by supporting a common regional advisor, joint workshops, and a common GDDS framework.
- Coordination and collaboration:
  - The project enhanced coordination between the IMF, World Bank, and regional TA providers.
  - The project assisted STA to lead in implementing Fund-wide recommendations on TA provision, including lessons from the Fund’s Internal Evaluation Office and the joint Fund/World Bank Report on collaboration.
  - The project intensified STA’s support for international initiatives such as the Marrakech Action Plan for Statistics (MAPS) and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
- Integration into STA operations:
  - During the project STA made progress integrating project TA into broader Fund objectives, including medium-term budget envelopes and assessment of outcomes.
  - The project experience informed design and implementation adjustments incorporated into STA’s TA program.

### Project context and data standards
- The AAf project operated within the Fund’s Data Standards Initiative (DSI), which comprises:
  - Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS), approved by the Executive Board and established in 1996.
  - General Data Dissemination System (GDDS), established in 1997, emphasizing capacity building and metadata preparation.
- Participation statistics (as reported):
  - Over the 12-year life of the DSI, the number of countries participating in the SDDS reached 64.
  - Over the same period, the number of countries participating in the GDDS totaled 90.
  - Six GDDS countries have “graduated” to the SDDS; these are included in the SDDS total.
  - Only one AFR country, South Africa (not part of this project), subscribes to the SDDS.

### Lessons learned and programmatic changes
- Process orientation and TA sequencing:
  - Phase I was initially focused on GDDS participation and preparatory advocacy; emphasis later shifted to TA delivery to implement plans for improvement.
- External funding implications:
  - DFID financing greatly increased STA’s leverage and reach, enabling more missions and broader topic coverage than would otherwise have been possible.
  - External financing introduced new requirements for coordination with Fund departments, the World Bank, and regional providers.
- Monitoring, evaluation, and supervision:
  - Supervision of mostly external TA experts by Fund staff provided quality control and enabled subsequent evaluation of TA effectiveness.
  - Joint reviews and project evaluation reports informed adjustments and lessons incorporated into the successor Phase II.
- Transition to Phase II:
  - DFID extended financing into Phase II (2006–2009), designed during 2005/06 and drawing on Phase I lessons.
  - Phase II introduces a more modular, multicountry platform for TA delivery, reflecting lessons from Phase I.

### Sustainability and longer-term issues
- Progress and risks:
  - Many participating countries made concrete progress in statistical description, output, quality, and dissemination.
  - Longer-term sustainability of capacity gains is not assured due to the long-term nature of capacity building and insufficient national priority and funding for statistical reforms.
- Efforts to strengthen sustainability:
  - Efforts include linking GDDS work to the poverty reduction strategy approach to secure medium-to long-term funding for statistical reforms.
  - Regional cooperation and peer pressure mechanisms have been promoted.
  - Some countries were encouraged to graduate to the SDDS, where sustained compilation and dissemination are monitored.
- Importance of continued external financing:
  - Continued DFID commitment to funding was regarded as essential to consolidating gains achieved under Phase I.

### Review and evaluation process
- The review draws on:
  - Six-monthly and final reports prepared by STA and the World Bank.
  - Three joint project reviews undertaken in 2002, 2003, and 2007.
  - TA mission reports, interviews with country officials, and project evaluation reports (PERs) for Ghana, Kenya, and Sierra Leone.
- Overlap with Phase II:
  - Phase I execution and its final evaluation overlapped with early implementation of Phase II (May–December 2006), so the Phase I review considered early Phase II developments.

*Source: Executive Summary, AAf Project Phase I (2001–2006), IMF Statistics Department (STA).*

### 9.      The IMF, through STA, focused on the overall GDDS and macroeconomic statistics

### 9. The IMF, through STA, focused on the overall GDDS and macroeconomic statistics

### Project management, financing, and responsibilities
- IMF (through STA) was responsible for: overall GDDS and macroeconomic statistics issues; administrative aspects of joint project operations; responsibility for the regional advisor. Combined STA cost: US$5.1 million.
- World Bank was responsible for the socio-demographic statistical aspect of the project.
- Project managers were based at headquarters; a regional manager was based in Nairobi; these managers were responsible for day-to-day operations.
- DFID provided the bulk of the financing. Fund and Bank provided headquarters support and coordination of TA extended to 14 (eventually, 15) participating Anglophone African (AAf) countries.
- Under Phase I, Fund staff travel costs were not covered by the project; bilateral Fund-specialized TA over 2002–2006 was delivered entirely by outside experts. STA staff provided backstopping (supervision) and participated in certain workshops and regional events.
- Project funding lines and notes (as presented in Box 1):
  - U.K. Department for International Development (DFID)
  - Fund and Bank projects merged in May 2004 (Combined total of US$8.6 millions)
  - Fund (Statistics Dept.): Project started Nov. 2001; Macroeconomic statistics; HQ project manager*; Staff quality control
  - Bank (Dev. Data Group): Project started mid-2002; Sociodemographic statistics; HQ project manager; Staff support
  - Regional Advisor* (Nairobi, Kenya); Sector experts (external)*; Sector experts (some Bank, some external)*
  - * = DFID-funded.

### Objectives, participants, and monitoring
- Project objectives (Box 1):
  1. Assist countries to join the GDDS via preparatory workshops and help with development of metadata and plans for improvement.
  2. Provide TA to help countries implement plans for improvement in their statistics as set out in the metadata (phased in as countries became participants in the GDDS).
  3. Foster cooperation among agencies at the national and regional levels through workshops (added while project was being executed).
- Country participants (Phase I): Fourteen (14) original countries — Botswana, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe (not active because of arrears to the Fund). Ghana joined in 2004.
- Monitoring and evaluation:
  - Six-monthly progress reports, leading to 10 such reports over the life of the project.
  - Joint DFID/Fund/WB reviews as specified in the project document.
  - Three mission reviews in 2002, 2003, and 2007.
  - All TA missions subject to STA monitoring practices, including entries into TAIMS and preparation of EMARs.

### Participation in the GDDS — outcomes and progress
- GDDS emphasis: preparation, dissemination, updating of metadata and posting by the Fund on the DSBB; DSBB central location since September 1996.
- GDDS norms do not require dissemination of metadata in national publications or on official national websites, though encouraged and practiced by some countries.
- Regional progress (2002–06):
  - Africa (AFR) made the most progress; 14 of the 27 African countries that joined the GDDS between 2002 and 2006 were project participants.
  - Within the project, 12 of the 15 joined the GDDS in 2002–2003 after preparing metadata and complying with GDDS guidelines.
  - Two countries had delayed participation: Ghana joined the project in 2004; Liberia was affected by prolonged civil war.
- Institutional arrangements in project countries:
  - All GDDS participants nominate a GDDS coordinator to work with national statistics agencies on metadata and plans for improvement; in project countries these coordinators also served as contact persons for prioritization and scheduling of TA.
  - Some countries created interagency technical committees that functioned as coordinating bodies for reform prioritization and TA requests.
- Output from joining GDDS: preparation of detailed statistical practice descriptions often resulted in 20 or more metadata tables and documents usually exceeding 100 pages; in many countries this was the first comprehensive documentation of the statistical system.

### Capacity-building outcomes and TA delivery
- TA delivery picked up momentum as countries joined the GDDS; plans for improvement were integral to metadata and a pre-requisite for other outcomes.
- Mission statistics (Table 1):
  - Total missions in Phase I: 281 missions.
  - IMF missions: 189.
  - World Bank missions: 92.
  - Topical TA missions: 233.
  - Workshops and regional conferences: 48.
  - Mission timing: number of missions in 2005–2006 comparable to 2003–2004, indicating sustained effort.
- IMF TA mission decomposition (Table 2, topical totals across project countries):
  - External: 33
  - Fiscal: 35
  - Monetary/Financial: 15
  - National Accounts: 30
  - Prices: 15
  - GDDS and Planning: 40
  - Workshop and Presentation at Conferences: 21
  - Grand Total (IMF missions): 189
- Country-level mission counts (selected highlights from Table 2):
  - Sierra Leone: Total 20 missions (External 4; Fiscal 2; Monetary/Financial 4; National Accounts 5; Workshops/Presentations 5).
  - Swaziland: Total 24 missions (External 5; Fiscal 4; Monetary/Financial 3; National Accounts 3; Prices 5; GDDS and Planning 4).
  - Botswana and Namibia: each 14 missions recorded in table breakdowns.
  - Most participating AAf countries received between 10 and 20 missions each, with outliers Eritrea and Nigeria.
- TA delivery methods (Box 2):
  - Technical assistance based on “Areas in Need of Improvement” identified in GDDS metadata; some countries prepared project-specific TA priority plans.
  - Bank TA usually provided in a single visit or one follow-up mission; Fund TA typically delivered in a series of three or four missions.
  - Fund began with four dedicated experts (one per topical area) and broadened the expert pool to more than 30 individuals as the project progressed.
  - Fund TA provided with professional supervision (backstopping) by topical divisions; Fund used numerical ratings by experts for extent task accomplishment.

### Selected country outputs and sectoral achievements (Box 3 highlights)
- 2002:
  - Malawi: Work plans defined.
  - Namibia: Work started on new data sources and surveys.
- 2003:
  - Botswana: BOP sources developed for capital flows; quarterly BOP tables ready.
  - Kenya: Reporting acquired on large extrabudgetary funds; GFS compilation for general government completed.
  - Namibia: Metadata drafted and sent to IMF.
  - Sierra Leone: BPM5 to be adopted with next annual publication.
- 2004:
  - Botswana: Bridge tables developed to link fiscal accounts to GFSM 2001.
  - Lesotho: Bridge tables to GFSM 2001 prepared.
  - Liberia: Broad assessment of potential BOP sources and production of partial BOP statement; GFS compilation enabled for major portions of the government.
  - Namibia: New data sources identified for BOP accounts.
  - Swaziland: National master plan for household surveys.
- 2005:
  - Botswana: Integrated Monetary Database completed.
  - Ethiopia: New formats for measuring short-term capital flows; sources identified for IIP data.
  - Kenya: Five-year plan for government statistics prepared.
  - Sierra Leone: Data from extrabudgetary entities attained for GFS compilations.
  - Zambia: New chart of fiscal accounts based on GFSM 2001.
- 2006:
  - Ghana: Data compiled on various extrabudgetary funds; GFS tables compiled; progress on developing PPI statistics, which was eventually launched in early 2007.
  - Kenya: CBS agrees to collect data on extrabudgetary units and social security fund.
  - Liberia: CPI developed with new weights, replacing index based on 1964.
  - Malawi: BOP series revised over 1994–2000, and IIP data compiled for 2000–2001.
  - Sudan: Improvements in government accounts classification and monetary statistics.
  - Zambia: Comprehensive household and industry surveys for national accounts.
- Source attribution for these outputs: reports of TA experts after visits during the program.

### Results on cooperation, awareness, and sustainability considerations
- National GDDS Awareness Workshops were promoted and sponsored in a majority of project countries; some countries held second workshops the following year.
- Regional advisor country visits supported development of interagency TA priority plans and sensitization of senior officials; a high-level workshop was attended by the Director of STA and featured the Governor of the Bank of Botswana as keynote speaker.
- Annual regional workshops provided opportunities for senior staff and GDDS coordinators to review project developments and discuss common issues.
- Evaluations by participant countries tended to be positive while recognizing continued needs to address data compilation and dissemination problems.
- Sustainability caveat noted: many significant outcomes from statistical capacity building require sustained effort over time and are not “quick fixes”; whether progress is internalized into national commitments remains an open question.

*Source: _032108a - 9.      The IMF, through STA, focused on the overall GDDS and macroeconomic statistics*

### Box 4. Interviews with AAf Project Participants at End of Phase I: Summary of Views

### Box 4. Interviews with AAf Project Participants at End of Phase I: Summary of Views

### Perceived achievements from Phase I (country survey, Cape Town workshop, September 2006)
- AAf project helped agencies and individual compilers better understand and identify gaps in data series and methodologies.
- Most agencies indicated that data series had improved, and that they now have shorter time lags and better coverage.
- Some agencies reported greater response rate to questionnaires.

### Maintenance of data quality and sustainability concerns
- Several country representatives answered yes when asked whether agencies would be able to maintain the current quality of data, but many also stressed intent to improve further (“not there yet”).
- Factors making the ability to maintain data fragile:
  - staff not yet fully trained or staff turn-over,
  - software problems,
  - data not yet ready for publication,
  - outstanding gaps to close.

### Metadata and institutional awareness
- Countries that participated most actively are able to update or confirm their metadata on a regular basis, once a year.
- Awareness seminars helped create demand for quality data and, in some cases, provided better understanding of roles and responsibilities among data-generating agencies.

### Technical assistance (TA) and mission effectiveness
- TA through expert missions was generally of high quality.
- Missions that included general briefing or training for a larger audience or a good wrap-up meeting were particularly useful.
- In a few cases, a longer mission duration would have been helpful.
- Visits by the Regional Advisor and the World Bank team leader improved managerial understanding and coordination using GDDS as an organizing framework.
- Subregional seminars involving 4–6 countries on a specific topic were rated as very effective for training and mutual learning.

### Awareness workshops — format, reach, and cost-effectiveness
- Awareness workshops were usually one-day events attracting between 50 and 200 participants.
- Typical agenda items:
  - presentation by the Regional Advisor on the role of the GDDS,
  - presentations by agency representatives on improvements made as a result of TA received,
  - general presentations on activities of statistics agencies.
- Workshops generated active discussion and, in most cases, some national press coverage.
- Participant evaluations were overwhelmingly positive; workshops often provided the first overview and better understanding of linkages among data-producing agencies and were described as “eye openers.”
- Typical project contribution per workshop was limited to hiring a meeting hall, preparation of materials, and some hospitality (coffee and lunch), at an average expense of about $3,000–$4,000 per workshop.

### Regional events, study tours, and south-to-south learning
- A few study tours were organized to show officials, first hand, how reforms were conducted in more advanced regional countries.
- Regional, topically-oriented workshops were held, usually in cooperation and cost-sharing with regional agencies, including East AFRITAC.
- Total number of joint seminars conducted with regional partners came to 15 during 2003–06.
- Example: a series of three seminars on the statistics of Private Capital Flows (PCFs) launched in mid-2004 for Lesotho, Namibia, and Swaziland, with MEFMI invited as an observer.
  - The first seminar produced active exchanges and useful experience-sharing.
  - The presence of a MEFMI observer from the Bank of Uganda added practical realism.
  - The third seminar in Kampala combined with a study tour; participants reported feeling fully confident to introduce and run the system domestically, with the remaining constraint being availability of resources for running the survey.
- Regional encounters often generated stimulating discussions, helped find solutions aligned with regional requirements, and in some cases fostered south-to-south technical assistance extending the project’s reach.

### Cooperation with the World Bank and project flexibility
- Cooperation between the Fund and the World Bank increased significantly; the two project components were merged in May 2004.
- Merging facilitated more integrated project activities, enhanced coordination for TA missions, and improved preparation of joint six-monthly reports.
- Project flexibility allowed better coordination of TA missions and filling gaps as they became apparent.

### Interim reviews (role, findings, and impact)
- Regular reviews were integral to the project’s monitoring and evaluation; STA invited the Fund’s Office of Technical Assistance Management (OTM) to join early reviews.
- First joint review (Nov/Dec 2002; final report Jan 2003) identified issues and recommended enhanced awareness workshops (regional and national) and extension of the project by six months.
- Second review (Dec 2003) highlighted:
  - need for a sustainable system for maintaining metadata and routine TA review of metadata,
  - encourage greater government ownership of TORs and timing of TA missions,
  - better define links between the DFID project and other statistical capacity-building efforts (MDG monitoring, PARIS21, East AFRITAC, ACBF).
  - recommended extending the project for a further two years (to April 2006, with some spillover to end-2006).
- Third joint review (early 2007), with a stronger DFID role and external experts, examined administration, regional advisor role, and project managers, and included missions to Ghana, Kenya, and Sierra Leone.

### Key findings from the third review (summary and quoted assessment)
- Quoted assessment on administration and TA delivery:
  - “In general, the financial management of the AAf project appears good overall. The IMF operated an efficient and comprehensive TA pool of international experts for GDDS Phase I. The GDDS regional advisor guided countries through the selection and use of consultants. Over time, countries were able to have greater input into TA TORs, which was welcomed—this improvement was suggested by the then DFID statistical advisor charged with liaising with the AAf project. Key informants for this evaluation indicated that during this period (around 2003–06), DFID was closely engaged in the AAf project operation and review, making a number of recommendations that were taken on board by the project and which resulted in countries using GDDS TA and workshops to better effect.”
- Box 7 summary findings (Phase I, 2001–06):
  - The evaluation team found Phase I well managed with evidence of effective coordination between the WB and IMF.
  - The project is accessible and benefits from good communication between project staff and key stakeholders.
  - The GDDS regional advisor, based in Nairobi, is critical to communication and coordination, enabling timely access to high-quality expertise.
  - Most project-funded TA was delivered very effectively, with a few exceptions of incomplete or less appropriate TA.
  - TA contributed to capacity building across a broad range of subjects: development of metadata and plans for improvement, national accounts and prices, balance of payments, health and population data, and agriculture sector data.
  - GDDS awareness workshops contributed to improved cross-agency communication.
  - It is harder to determine how better data collection, analysis, and dissemination are contributing to planning and policymaking.
  - Evidence cited that countries’ borrowing costs are reduced by 8 percent when signed up to the GDDS and up to 20 percent when the country meets the SDDS standard.
  - Further ‘purpose level’ impacts to be explored in the full GDDS Phase II evaluation planned for late 2008 or early 2009.

### Recommendations from the third review (selected)
- Rearticulate the role of the GDDS regional advisor and support national GDDS coordinators in redefining and reasserting their role within Phase II’s modular approach.
- Consider how to sustain cross-government working, intercountry networking, and knowledge sharing under the modular approach of GDDS Phase II.
- Support countries to make annual updates to metadata and to log changes; encourage posting metadata on national websites and linking to the IMF website; encourage documentation of progress against plans for improvement.
- Continue to strengthen local consultancy capacity.
- Pay greater attention to realism of country plans, linkage between metadata, plans for improvement, and NSDSs, and monitoring project outputs against this backdrop, including whether GDDS TA recommendations are implemented.
- Undertake a risk assessment and mitigation planning exercise to increase sustainability of capacity-building efforts and contribution to purpose-level objectives.

### Monitoring, evaluation, and TAIMS
- TAIMS was adopted formally by STA and other TA departments in May 2005 to improve TA management, monitoring, evaluation, and information sharing.
- TAIMS covers the TA project cycle and includes four reports: Project Framework Summary (PFS), Statement of Mission Tasks (SMT), End-of-Mission Assessment Report (EMAR), and Project Evaluation Report (PER).
  - SMT and EMAR are prepared for each TA mission.
  - PFS and PER are prepared for a country at the beginning and end of a project (series of missions).
  - PERs are generally prepared about a year after project completion to assess sustainability.
- The PFS sets objectives, outputs, verifiable indicators, expected completion dates, and risks/assumptions; it is updated during the project based on SMTs and EMARs.

### Country case reviews and PER-based findings
- The evaluation of TA provided to Ghana, Kenya, and Sierra Leone used STA’s TAIMS and PERs.
- The three countries received a total of 29 TA missions in macroeconomic topical areas (external sector, government finance, monetary and financial statistics, and the real sector).
- These missions constituted a total of eight projects with inputs ranging from a single mission up to five missions per project.
- A total of five PERs have been prepared for these country projects.
- Consistent PER and compiler survey feedback: areas with least progress were coordination with donors and data dissemination, including to the Fund.
- Table 3 PER summaries (select observations):
  - Project ratings largely “Largely achieved” across several project objectives.
  - Compilers’ survey responses indicated weaknesses particularly in data provision to IMF and donor coordination, and in data dissemination.
  - Authorities often reported improved data quality, but scope of data still limited.
  - Staff comments emphasized need for follow-up with data providers and regular upgrading of skills.
  - Some projects produced new manuals and led to data being reported to IMF, while some entities’ data quality still needed improvement.

*Source: IMF Statistics Department (content from the AAf project Phase I evaluation materials).*

### 33.      The available PERs to date provide a very good basis (both quantitative and

### _032108a - 33.      The available PERs to date provide a very good basis (both quantitative and

### Overview of PERs and project outcomes
- The available PERs provide a very good basis (both quantitative and qualitative) for an overview of the outcome of TA projects with respect to the overall objectives, outputs (including priority and ratings), and, where available, the compilers’ views.
- Information sources provide a 360o assessment, containing inputs from the authorities (both at the senior officials’ and at the compilers’ level), staff, and experts.
- For each individual project, the information highlights areas of success or weaknesses critical to guiding more detailed assessment.
- Overall finding: the five projects were largely successful in meeting their objectives with generally favorable ratings for the outputs.

### Country reviews: Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone
- Sample coverage:
  - Visits to Ghana, Kenya, and Sierra Leone were not randomly selected but provide broad and relevant experience.
- Kenya:
  - An original participant.
  - Benefited from posting of the regional advisor in Nairobi and substantial donor support.
  - Donor support and strong local leadership were instrumental in broad adoption and use of metadata and plans for developing an NSDS (called the Strategic Implementation Master Plan in Kenya), of which the GDDS was an integral part.
- Sierra Leone:
  - An original participant that suffered from a prolonged civil war and sizable staff turnover.
  - Despite resource problems, managed to develop and utilize metadata effectively in some statistical agencies and has made good, but not yet complete, progress in preparing an NSDS.
- Ghana:
  - A latecomer (in 2004) and missed regional GDDS awareness workshops (Botswana and Namibia), limiting effective development and use of metadata to just one institution.
  - Data dissemination: Ghana Statistics Service (GSS) adopted monthly press conferences to release the rebased consumer price index and the newly established producer price index—considered best practice. Both the rebased CPI and launching of the PPI (in early 2007) were supported by the AAf project TA.

### Data dissemination and resourcing issues
- Data dissemination emerged as an important issue in all three countries:
  - Ghana: GSS monthly press conferences raised the profile of GSS and enhanced statistics; welcomed by data users.
  - Kenya and Sierra Leone: several statistical agencies/units were frustrated by inability to publish or post TA-developed data on websites, leaving data not readily available to policy makers or the public.
- Common problem: inadequate resources—both skilled staff and budgetary funding—to support medium-to long-term reforms.
- TA delivery and absorption were generally effective, but some experts fell short of providing planned TA. STA responded by working with authorities to address underlying problems (see Box 9).

### STA response to TA delivery problems (Box 9 summary)
- Following a June 2007 internal review that found coordination and completion problems in some TA missions:
  - STA terminated the services of the three external experts involved.
  - STA hired an expert to complete the TA report of the two relevant missions with joint recommendations to the Kenyan authorities.
  - STA sent a follow-up mission to Ghana to agree on measures to address underlying problems and to enable further TA missions to resolve issues.
  - Discussions focused on short-to-long-term actions to enhance funding and coordination among national statistical agencies, improve access to source data, and strengthen donor coordination. Donors took expedited action to enhance coordination among themselves and with local agencies.

### Lessons from the reviews
- Evolution of project focus:
  - From promoting the GDDS and statistics through metadata development, followed by TA and capacity-building, to broader objectives including regional cooperation and collaboration between domestic and regional agencies.
- Central theme in recommendations: how best to provide national ownership of capacity-building efforts.
- Adaptations:
  - Traditional short-term TA missions complemented by enhanced roles for GDDS coordinators and the regional advisor to promote statistical awareness and coordination.
  - GDDS provided a comprehensive strategic framework facilitating prioritization of reforms and TA needs.
  - In two of three countries, GDDS provided important foundation for NSDS preparation.
- Specific lessons about TA delivery:
  - Regional approach useful for sharing experience and creating peer pressure.
  - Effectiveness enhanced when TA is focused and targeted to small groups of countries with similar capacity needs.
  - Country participation in setting specific TA objectives and assessing outcomes contributes to greater ownership and accountability.
  - Measures to alleviate administrative and backstopping burdens on STA divisions (e.g., module managers) enhance ownership and accountability by TA providers.

### Integration of the AAf project into STA operations and additionality
- External financing by DFID and donors for AFRITACs substantially supported STA’s TA program in Africa.
- Contribution over time:
  - Compared with nothing in 2000 and 2001 (prior to this external funding), the AAf project-funded TA and AFRITAC-funded missions accounted for almost one third of total STA missions to Africa by 2003 and roughly three quarters by 2008.
  - Virtually all increase in STA’s TA missions to Africa since 2002 (some 170 additional missions) was supported by the AAf project (67) and the AFRITACs (87), demonstrating substantial “additionality.”
- Result: missions funded from these additional resources were fully integrated in STA day-to-day operations.
- Documentation and evaluation:
  - Integration produced extensive documentation (mission briefs, back-to-office reports, TA reports, review reports).
  - STA developed a fully inclusive evaluation tool of all its ongoing TA activities, providing ready access to source information for review and evaluation.

### Key statistics on STA TA missions (calendar-year basis)
- All TA missions to AFR:
  - 2000: 32
  - 2001: 36
  - 2002: 36
  - 2003: 99
  - 2006: 115
  - 2007: 142
  - 2008 (Est.): 209
- Of which funded by DFID:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 4
  - 2003: 31
  - 2006: 54
  - 2007: 35
  - 2008 (Est.): 67
- Of which funded by AFRITAC:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0
  - 2003: 1
  - 2006: 19
  - 2007: 53
  - 2008 (Est.): 87
- Person years funded by DFID:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0.73
  - 2003: 2.48
  - 2006: 4.98
  - 2007: 3.03
  - 2008 (Est.): 6.26
- Person years funded by AFRITAC:
  - 2000: 0
  - 2001: 0
  - 2002: 0
  - 2003: 0.43
  - 2006: 2.41
  - 2007: 2.93
  - 2008 (Est.): 4.55

### Value added from DFID external funding
- DFID external funding enabled the Fund to extend its reach and technical assistance beyond what its own resources would have supported.
- Enabled:
  - Higher frequency and more extensive TA to Africa.
  - Expansion into multiple sectors rather than at most one mission per year per country.
  - Timely follow-up to monitor and support implementation of prior recommendations and hands-on assistance.
  - Complementary activities: study tours, regional workshops, specialized training courses, statistical awareness programs.
- By the end of the project, all countries but one were participating in the GDDS and working on their plans for improvement.

### Phase II of the AAf project: design and incorporation of Phase I lessons
- Phase II overview:
  - Timeframe: extends over three years, 2006–2009.
  - Format changes: more emphasis on multi-country collaboration and assistance, workshops and meetings built around substantive “modules” rather than primary emphasis on single-country TA.
  - Additional participating countries added: The Gambia, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda.
- Administrative and delivery adjustments:
  - Retained project managers/advisors; managers were very effective and role left unchanged.
  - Modifications to TA delivery to address backstopping pressure on STA:
    - (a) allow staff travel to be covered on a limited basis by the project to enhance field supervision and evaluation of TA;
    - (b) allow STA to contract for headquarters-based module managers to ease administrative burden (e.g., contract preparations) and backstopping responsibilities of STA divisions.
- Major lessons informing Phase II module approach:
  - Regional approach promotes experience sharing and beneficial peer pressure.
  - Focused TA targeted to small groups with similar capacity needs enhances effectiveness.
  - Country participation in setting TA objectives and assessing outcomes increases ownership and accountability.
  - Use of module managers alleviates administrative burdens and enhances provider ownership and accountability.
- Module structure:
  - Limited number of modules—eight for the Fund and seven for the Bank (socio-demographic topics)—run by module managers.
  - TA modules launched and concluded with workshops for participating countries to agree on and evaluate TA objectives.
- Topical focus in Phase II:
  - Five topical TA modules for STA: monetary and financial (two parallel modules), balance of payments, government finance, and national accounts statistics—each focused on more narrowly defined issues to set realistic outcomes within Phase II timeframe.
- Broader objectives:
  - Modules link more directly with evolving Fund work program, other international organizations, and donors.
  - Greater emphasis for some countries on developing and implementing plans for systematic statistical improvement and stronger expectations on actual dissemination of economic and financial data.
  - Greater efforts to promote regional TA to address systemic issues on a multi-country basis.
- Specific modules highlighted:
  - GDDS/PRSP module: mainstreaming statistics in PRSP to enhance priority and funding for broader statistical reforms; helps create national summary data pages (NSDPs); efforts to improve dissemination and national websites to institutionalize data processes and ensure sustainability.
  - SACU module: addressing compilation of customs data among SACU members (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland) on a regional basis; produced full documentation of current compilation practices by each country and a report recommending harmonization according to international best practices.
  - SDDS module: aims to propel project countries to graduate to a self-sustaining standard ensuring production and dissemination of high-quality data.

*Source: IMF Statistics Department (content unit _032108a).*

### 52.      In some important ways, the AAf project has provided STA with the experience to

### _032108a - 52.      In some important ways, the AAf project has provided STA with the experience to

### TA program lessons and Fund-wide implications
- The 2005 review of TA programs by the Fund’s Internal Evaluation Office (IEO) stressed:
  - (1) enhancing the strategic prioritization and resource allocation to increase the relevance of the TA program;
  - (2) promoting the effectiveness of various modalities of TA delivery, including the country specificity of the diagnosis and proposed solutions, as well as domestic ownership of recommendations;
  - (3) enhancing monitoring and evaluation activities so that lessons from past TA can be a guide to future allocation and design of TA; and
  - (4) improving coordination with other TA providers.
- The Malan Report (IMF, 2007) advocated better coordination between the Fund, Bank and other providers in the delivery of capacity building and other services to low-income countries.
- The AAf project has provided useful lessons in all these areas and, where feasible, has shared them with other TA providers.

### Longer-term TA issues and medium-term evaluation
- The evaluation of TA to low income countries must address longer-term strategic issues, including sustainability of reforms.
- STA has enhanced medium-term TA evaluation via program evaluation for a country or a project for several countries:
  - Such an evaluation is conducted after three to five years, which covers the constituent projects executed during that period.
  - STA is currently conducting such TA program evaluation in two selected area department regions every year on a staggered basis.
- The comprehensive review approach allows a more strategic approach to improvements in the TA program and better integration into the broader Fund and international community agenda.

### Collaboration with donors and international frameworks
- Close collaboration with donors, particularly DFID and the World Bank, and the various pilot modules in Phase II, have formed a good basis to contribute to internationally agreed strategies for low-income countries, including:
  - broader application of the GDDS framework to enhance national priority and funding in the PRS approach,
  - support for MAPS,
  - and the Paris Declaration for Aid Effectiveness.
- Phase II pilot modules and donor collaboration have informed project adaptations (see Kibuka, 2007b, and World Bank and PARIS21, 2007 in source).

### Sustainability challenges for statistical capacity building
- The aim of most TA is internalization of reforms into routine operations, but sustainability is not guaranteed.
- For AAf countries benefiting from large DFID-financed support, sustainability cannot be answered definitively at this stage; central sustainability issues include:
  - ownership;
  - effective preparation and use of metadata;
  - plans for improvement;
  - TA prioritization;
  - effective absorption and retention of skills.
- Capacity building has a long gestation period; amounts expended per country thus far are relatively small compared with potential benefits.

### Key resource and system requirements for sustainability
- Adequate awareness and medium-term funding priority are central to sustaining reform processes.
- Critical resource needs:
  - adequate skilled staff for knowledge transfer and retention, requiring maintenance of staff strength, regular training, and competitive remuneration;
  - regular surveys/censuses and maintenance of administrative data systems as source data (including appropriate weights) for compiling macroeconomic statistics;
  - equipment for transport and IT systems, appropriate office space and power supply, with regular maintenance and upgrades.
- All components of the statistical system require adequate resources from the national budget and donors; inadequate resources will lead to breakdowns, increased time lags, and ad hoc substitute data, undermining TA impact.
- Early emphasis in Phase I on advocacy via regional and national workshops and a visible role for the regional advisor showed evidence of success, but beneficiary countries are not yet able to provide the funding to maintain reform momentum.

### Slippage, dissemination, and accountability concerns
- Some participating countries are slipping from adherence to GDDS norms, such as regular updating and submission of metadata (See Appendix Table 5 in source)—this shortfall should be monitored and redressed.
- Phase I was process oriented and the GDDS framework itself was not fully focused on data outputs, leading to haphazard evidence of improved data quality driven by national preferences rather than GDDS features.
- Phase II has intensified pilots to directly promote data dissemination, including GDDS/PRSP and SDDS modules providing TA to develop a NSDP, strengthen coordination of national agencies’ websites, and enhance the GDDS coordinator role—changes that better link TA inputs to data availability and align GDDS with SDDS to facilitate graduation to higher data standards (see IMF, 2008 in source).
- There has been weak follow-through on short- and medium-term objectives for improving national statistics outlined on the DSBB metadata; Phase II tightens accountability for promises made with prospects of better performance over the 2006–2009 interval.

### Indicators of progress and outcomes
- Some participant countries have attained sovereign bond ratings and thus gained conceptual access to international capital markets (illustrated in Appendix Table 6).
- At least one recent study found evidence that participation in the GDDS has lowered borrowing costs for these countries, albeit by only a modest amount (see Cady and Pellechio, 2006 in source).
- Participation in the GDDS may reflect broader policy conditions making countries better candidates for international credit markets.

### Conclusions on Phase I outcomes and institutional effects
- The review points to a broadly successful outcome for recipient countries and for the Fund:
  - All but one participating country joined the GDDS and have achieved significant outputs in documenting statistical systems via metadata and detailed plans for improvement.
  - Many have made good progress in implementing these plans, though reforms have been hampered by the long-term nature of capacity building and still-inadequate national priority and funding.
- For the Fund:
  - DFID financial support has begun to fill an important gap in African regional efforts, promoting the GDDS through advocacy and additional TA.
  - Evaluations and reviews have reinforced the Fund’s internal TA procedures.
  - Lessons and donor/region collaboration helped adapt STA’s TA program and initiate strategic work in capacity building supporting PRSP and TA, and promoted international initiatives (MAPS, PARIS21, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness).
- Project structure and operational integration:
  - The AAf project’s unique structure used the GDDS as an organizing framework and three components funded through separate operating budgets, permitting parallel execution while allowing Fund and World Bank to follow their own administrative practices.
  - Flexible arrangements made it easier for STA to incorporate project elements into its ongoing program, supported by the Fund’s DSI activities in Africa.
  - STA integrated capacity building and TA into operating procedures, backstopping external experts for quality control and enabling subsequent evaluations to assess TA effectiveness.
  - A limited sample of pilot PERs in three of the 15 countries demonstrated the framework’s usefulness for qualitative and quantitative assessment.
- DFID funding effects:
  - DFID funding enabled STA to widen TA and GDDS support to the 15 African countries beyond what Fund resources alone would support.
  - Parallel execution produced efficiency gains for DFID and lowered “transactions costs” for recipient countries via a common regional advisor and joint workshops.
- Innovations and Phase II design:
  - STA introduced modular TA delivery to address groups of countries, improving content focus and targeting countries with similar capacity needs, reducing backstopping burden, and promoting recipient/provider ownership and accountability.
  - Awareness of constraints from inadequate resources led to a pilot model linking GDDS to PRSP and the medium-term expenditure framework.
  - DFID agreed to finance Phase II, which incorporated recommendations such as modular design and multi-country activities.
- Long-term perspective:
  - Capacity building remains daunting; Phase I objectives were limited and resource-intensive.
  - Phase II, with increased resources and country coverage, promises to extend and consolidate Phase I progress.

### Appendix I — Strengths and Weaknesses of the AAf Project, Phase I
Part 1: Summary of interviews (GDDS Phase II launch workshop, random sample of six countries)
- The GDDS project helped agencies and individual compilers better understand and identify gaps in data series and methodologies.
- Most agencies indicated data series had improved, with shorter time lags and better coverage; some reported greater response rates to questionnaires.
- Ability to maintain current data quality is improving but still fragile in some areas; countries reported intentions to improve further (“not there yet”).
  - Fragility reasons included staff lack of training or staff turnover, software problems, data not yet ready for publication, or outstanding gaps.
- Active GDDS participants (e.g., Botswana, Ghana, Swaziland) are able to update or confirm metadata once a year.
- Awareness seminars helped create demand for quality data and better understanding of roles among data-generating agencies.
- TA from expert missions was generally high quality; missions that included general briefing/training for larger audiences or good wrap-up meetings were particularly useful.
- Visits by the regional advisor and World Bank team leader improved managerial understanding and coordination; sub-regional seminars involving four–six countries were very effective for training and mutual learning.

Part 2: Summary of discussions — overview and regional cooperation
- TA missions produced substantial progress: improving timeliness, data compilation systems, identifying additional data sources, and improving dissemination methods.
- Countries set up GDDS technical committees but some had operational problems.
- Cooperation among agencies within the region was enhanced.
- Regional cooperation examples:
  - Seminars on BOP (Private Capital Flows) were held in Lesotho and Swaziland.
  - Survey data documentation and management workshop was held in Namibia.
- GDDS supported south-south TA in trade statistics (two staff from CSO Zambia undertook a TA Mission to CSO Botswana).
- Cooperation with AFRITAC and STATCAP initiatives and integration with other donors occurred.
- Tanzania and Uganda cooperated to compile the East African database.
- GDDS encouraged cooperation among SADC member countries.
- Feedback indicates TA missions were useful and helped improve data sourcing and methodology.

*Italic: Content based solely on the supplied IMF source text.*

### 3. The GDDS project played a greater role in having statistics as a component in the PRSPs.

### 3. The GDDS project played a greater role in having statistics as a component in the PRSPs.

### Role in PRSPs and TA findings
- The GDDS project played a greater role in having statistics as a component in the PRSPs.
- TA missions identified data gaps and areas for improvement.

### Remaining needs (as identified in TA missions)
- Countries stressed a need for continued assistance in various sectors.
- Training and capacity-building needs were identified, i.e., more capacity building needed in training staff.
- Develop in-house capacity within agencies involved.
- TA needs to be delivered in a working language; the new approach should take this into consideration.

### Problems highlighted
- Non-response (cooperation) from other participating agencies.
- Communication needs to be improved.
- Operation of the technical committees could be strengthened.

### Appendix Table 1 — The Data Dimension of the GDDS: Core Data Categories and Indicators (IMF Only)
- Real Sector
  - National accounts aggregates
    - Core Indicator: GDP (nominal and real)
    - Periodicity: Annual(quarterly encouraged)
    - Timeliness: 6-9 months
  - Manufacturing or industrial indices
    - Core Indicator: Production index / indices
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: Primary commodity, agricultural, or other indices, as relevant; As relevant; 6-12 weeks
  - Price indices
    - Core Indicator: Consumer price index
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 1-2 months
  - Labor market indicators
    - Core Indicators: Employment, unemployment, and wages/earnings
    - Periodicity: Annual 2/
    - Timeliness: 6-9 months
- Fiscal Sector
  - Central government aggregates
    - Core Indicators: Revenue, expenditure, balance, and financing with breakdowns
    - Periodicity: Quarterly
    - Timeliness: 1 quarter
  - Central government debt
    - Core Indicators: Domestic debt and foreign debt, as relevant, with appropriate breakdowns
    - Periodicity: Annual(quarterly encouraged)
    - Timeliness: 1-2 quarters
- Financial Sector
  - Broad money and credit aggregates
    - Core Indicators: Net external position, domestic credit, broad or narrow money
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 1-3 months
  - Central bank aggregates
    - Core Indicator: Monetary base
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 1-2 months
  - Interest rates
    - Core Indicator: Short and long-term government security rates
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 4/
  - Stock market
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 4/
- External Sector
  - Balance of payments aggregates
    - Core Indicators: Imports and exports of goods and services, current account balance, reserves, overall balance
    - Periodicity: Annual (quarterly strongly encouraged)
    - Timeliness: 6 months
  - Public and publicly guaranteed external debt, broken down by maturity
    - Periodicity: Quarterly
    - Timeliness: 1-2 quarters
  - Public and publicly guaranteed debt service schedule
    - Periodicity: Twice yearly (with data for 4 quarters and 2 semesters ahead)
    - Timeliness: 3-6 months
  - External debt and debt service
    - Periodicity: Annual
    - Timeliness: 6-9 months
  - International reserves
    - Core Indicator: Gross official reserves denominated in U.S. dollars
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 1-4 weeks
  - Merchandise trade
    - Core Indicators: Total exports and total imports
    - Periodicity: Monthly
    - Timeliness: 8-12 weeks
  - Exchange rates
    - Core Indicator: Spot rates
    - Periodicity: Daily
- Note: World Bank sociodemographic indicators omitted.

### Appendix Table 2 — TA Missions and Other Activities by Period, IMF, 2002–2006
- Period counts (by ending date columns): 10/02: 21; 4/03: 12; 10/03: 27; 4/04: 15; 10/04: 22; 4/05: 19; 10/05: 25; 4/06: 28; 12/06: 20.
- Grand Total: 189
- Country-level examples (mission totals shown in table):
  - Botswana: 14
  - Eritrea: 2
  - Ethiopia: 9
  - Ghana: 13
  - Kenya: 9
  - Lesotho: 10
  - Liberia: 9
  - Malawi: 12
  - Namibia: 14
  - Nigeria: 5
  - Sierra Leone: 20
  - Sudan: 10
  - Swaziland: 24
  - Zambia: 9
- Regional (LNS countries): 3

### Appendix Table 3 — Activities of the AAf Project, Phase I, from Nov. 2001 to April 2006
- Total missions and resource months:
  - Total: 108 missions (IMF) and 57 missions (WB)
  - 45 Country Visits
  - 14 GDDS Awareness
  - 15 Training Workshops
  - 4 Multicountry Coordinators
  - 16 Metadata Posted on DSBB
  - 14 Progress Report No. Missions
  - 105 p/m 1/ (persons-month from budget data)
- Period-by-period highlights (examples):
  - Nov 2001–Apr 2002: none; BOT, Dec.; 0 Metadata
  - May 2002–Oct 2002: 9 missions; 8 WB missions; 1 other mission; 4 countries (BOT, KEN, ZAM, ZIM); 11 p/m
  - Nov 2005–Apr 2006: 20 missions; 4 WB missions; BOT, Dec.; LIB, SIL; survey data; 15 p/m
  - May 2006–Aug 2006: xx missions; 14 Updates; 10 p/m
- Source: IMF Statistics Department. Notes: p/m = persons month; Other include participation and presentations by Reg. Adv and WBTL in various regional events.

### Appendix Table 4 — TA Missions and Other Activities by Country, World Bank, 2002–2006
- Topical mission counts by theme (Grand Total row):
  - Education: 5
  - Health: 3
  - Labor Markets: 5
  - Population: 16
  - Poverty: 18
  - Strategic Planning: 9
  - Data Management: 5
  - Other: 13
  - Workshops and Conference Presentations: 18
  - Grand Total: 92
- Country examples (totals shown in table):
  - Botswana: 15
  - Eritrea: 0
  - Ethiopia: 5
  - Ghana: 0
  - Kenya: 13
  - Lesotho: 8
  - Liberia: 2
  - Malawi: 1
  - Namibia: 8
  - Sierra Leone: 4
  - Sudan: 2
  - Swaziland: 11
  - Zambia: 1
  - Regional (West Africa): 4
  - Regional (SADC): 2
  - Project Countries: 16

### Appendix Table 5 — AAf Project Countries: Subscription Dates, ROSCs, and Metadata Updates (selected entries)
- GDDS subscription (as listed):
  - Botswana: 2002
  - Eritrea: 2003
  - Ethiopia: 2002
  - Ghana: 2005
  - Kenya: 2002
  - Lesotho: 2003
  - Liberia: 2005
  - Malawi: 2002
  - Namibia: 2002
  - Nigeria: 2003
  - Sierra Leone: 2003
  - Sudan: 2003
  - Swaziland: 2003
  - Zambia: 2002
- Data ROSC dates and metadata update examples (as listed):
  - Data ROSC: April 2002; Oct 2005; Feb. 2005; Sept 2002; Feb 2005
  - Last meta update (Real Sector, National Accounts, Fiscal Sector, Financial Sector, External Sector, Socio demographic): multiple country-specific entries such as May 2006; Oct 2003; Jul 2005; Jun 2006; June 2003; Feb 2007; Oct 2002; Dec 2005; June 2006; July 2003; Oct 2005; May 2006.
- Source: IMF Statistics Department.

### Appendix Table 6 — GDDS Countries with Sovereign Bond Ratings, by Rating Agency (as of April 2007)*
- Region/Country — Rating Agency presence — GDP per Capita (USD)
  1. Seychelles — S&P: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 8,668
  2. Mauritius — S&P: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 5,052
  3. Botswana — S&P: X; Moody's: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 5,014
  4. Namibia — Moody's: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 3,018
  5. Nigeria — S&P: X; Fitch: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 863
  6. Senegal — S&P: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 710
  7. Kenya — S&P: X; Fitch: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 560
  8. Mozambique — S&P: X; Moody's: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 338
  9. The Gambia — S&P: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 316
  10. Uganda — Fitch: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 316
  11. Madagascar — Moody's: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 266
  12. Malawi — Moody's: X — GDP per Capita (USD): 240
- Note: Counties in DFID Phase I Project in bold face.

*Source: IMF, 2008.

_Italic: Source — _032108a - 3. The GDDS project played a greater role in having statistics as a component in the PRSPs. (IMF PDF content provided)._

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pp/eng/2008/_032108a.pdf_