FINAL REVISED REPORT

EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCED NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN –II

(NACSAP II) 2008-2011 FOR THE REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

Submitted

10 th September 2012

to

The Preventing and Combating Corruption Bureau (PCCB)-Tanzania

and

United Nations Development Programme in Tanzania (UNDP)-Tanzania

by:

Maureen Wang’ati- Team Leader

Ramesh Shah, PhD- National Consultant

MAP OF TANZANIA1

1 http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blctanzania.htm

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 6

1.1 Demographic and Demographic Status 6

1.2 The NACSAP II Reform Programme In Tanzania 7

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH 12

2.1 Data Collection, Tools, Instruments 12

NACSAP II EVALUATION FINDINGS 15

3.1 Relevance 15

3.1 Relevance to GoT’s national goals in governance and combating corruption...............................................16

3.1.2 Relevance to various stakeholders needs in addressing corruption at various levels................................18

3.1.3 Relevance to NSAs....................................................................................................................................21

3.1.3 Acceptability and feasibility of activities for stakeholders for each component.......................................22

3.2 Effectiveness 23

3.2.1 Effectiveness in improving and strengthening public service delivery, through fostering transparency, integrity accountability in the conduct of public affairs..........................................................................................23

3.2.2 Effectiveness in strengthening oversight and watchdog institutions.........................................................24

3.2.3 Increasing public awareness about corruption...........................................................................................26

3.2.4 Widening the scope of public awareness and prevention by empowering non-state actors – private sector, NGOs, civil society organizations and the Media – both legally and operationally -- to participate effectively in the fight against corruption................................................................................................................27

i

3.2.4 Concerted government, civil society, private sector, development partner approach...............................28

3.2.5 Continual strengthening of the laws that relate to corruption and public accountability. Enforcement of anticorruption laws including prosecutions, punishments and the recovery of assets acquired through corrupt practices30

3.3 Efficiency 32

3.3.1 The efficacy of the planned activities within the time frame and budget for project implementation;.....32

3.3.2 To what extent resources were used appropriately to produce the intended outputs;...............................32

3.3.3 The extent to which project funds, expertise and time were used judiciously to achieve desired project results. 33

3.4 Impact 35

4 LESSONS LEARNED , LIMITATIONS 41

5 RECOMMENDATIONS 47

6 ANNEXES 60

Annex 1: REFERENCES 60

Annex 2. LIST OF EVALUATION PARTICIPANTS 61

Annex 3: INTERVIEW GUIDES 65

Questions in particular for Government agencies (ie: PCCB, GGCU, DPP, Judiciary, Police, MDAs, LGAs,)....65

Checklist for Government Agencies........................................................................................................................67

Interview Guide for Non State Actors.....................................................................................................................68

Interview Guide for Integrity Committees...............................................................................................................70

Annex 4: NACSAP II GOAL PROGRESS AND STATUS SUMMARY INSTRUMENT 72

Annex 5: UN GOVERNANCE ACTION PLAN (GAP) 101

Annex 6: TOR FOR THE NACSAP II EVALUATION 102

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The evaluation team wishes to thank the Director General, PCCB and the Country Director, UNDP-Tanzania Office for their professional support and commitment to the summative evaluation of National Anti-Corruption Strategy Action Plan (NACSAP) Phase II and for the excellent facilitation provided to the team on this demanding and complex evaluation assignment in Tanzania. The team also wishes to extend our sincere appreciation to the Evaluation Manager for his kind assistance and support to the team in scheduling interviews with Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), Local Government Agencies (LGAs) and other stakeholders and for facilitating timely, logistical support for field travel in Tanzania. We also with to thank the NACSAP II Unit Staff in Dar es Salaam, including the Programme Manager, Coordinator and Goal Coordinators; also to the PCCB Regional Bureau Chiefs and staff including Zonal Coordinators in Dar es Salaam, Morogoro and Dodoma for their cooperation, assistance and participation in interviews that helped to promote understanding about the NACSAP II’s progress, achievements and challenges.

Equally, the team acknowledges the participation by key National Steering Committee (NSC) members (i.e. the Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) as well as representatives from MDAs and LGAs in the evaluation. We are immensely grateful for their flexibility and willingness to grant interviews on short notice for the purpose of contributing to the consultants’ understanding about the NACSAP II. We also thank the representatives from non state actors (NSAs) including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), research and academic institutions youth and civil society organizations (CSOs) and international development partners for sharing their views, opinions and insights on the NACSAP II reform programme and for offering useful suggestions on the way forward.

This evaluation would not have been possible without the kind support by all participants. It is our hope that this report and its many findings and recommendations will find utility and relevance for furthering the important commitments of the Government of Tanzania’s national anti-corruption strategy going forward. Key amongst which is to address the root causes of corruption so as to promote good governance and to foster a free and fair social, economic and political environment for the benefit of all Tanzanians.

iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

APNAC - African Parliamentarian Network against CorruptionCAG - Controller Auditor GeneralCSO - Civil Society OrganizationCHRAGG – Commission for Human Rights and Good GovernanceDBC - District Bureau Chief DG - Director General [of PCCB]DPP - Director of Public ProsecutionEITI - Extractive Industries Transparency InitiativeESRF - Economic and Social Research FoundationGSM - Global System for Mobile communicationFBOs - Faith Based OrganizationDPs - Development PartnersGBS - General Budget SupportGGCU – Good Governance Coordinating UnitICs - Integrity CommitteesLGAs - Local Government AdministrationsLSRP – Legal Sector Reform ProgrammeMDAs – Ministries, Department and AgenciesM & E – Monitoring and EvaluationMKUKUTA – Mpango wa Kupunguza Kiwango cha Umaskini TanzaniaNACF - National Anti-Corruption ForumNACSAP II – National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan Phase IINAO - National Audit OfficeNEC - National Electoral CommissionPCCB – Prevention and Combating of Corruption BureauPETS - Public Expenditure Tracking SystemPMU- Programme Management UnitPPP- Private, Public PartnershipPPRA – Public Procurement Regulatory AuthorityPSRP- Public Sector Reform ProgrammeRBC - Regional Bureau ChiefREPOA – Research on Poverty AlleviationSDPs- Sector Development ProgrammesTOT - Training of TrainersTPSF - Tanzania Private Sector FoundationTRA - Tanzania Revenue Authority UNDP - United Nations Development ProgrammeWB - World Bank

iv

ZIC - Zone Integrity Committee

v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The Enhanced NACSAP Phase II Programme is a home grown programme of the Government of Tanzania. It represents one of the five core and cross cutting reform programmes of the Government of Tanzania that were generally designed to improve service delivery at the level of ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) and within local government authorities (LGAs).

2. A National Steering Committee (NSC) comprising the Preventing and Combating Corruption Bureau (PCCB), the Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and other Civil Society Organization (CSO)2 representatives including media with assistance from the developing partner- United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) –Tanzania NACSAP II was formed to spearhead the implementation of NACSAP II from 2008-2011. The NSC provided overall policy and strategic guidance to NACSAP II implementers who included an expanded group of state and non state actors in Tanzania. The NACSAP II reform programme formed the main vehicle for carrying out the aspirations of the Anti-Corruption Policy through eight goals areas:

3. The PCCB commissioned an evaluation of the recently concluded NACSAP II in December 2011. A team of two independent consultants including an international and national consultant carried out the evaluation over a 6-month period from February to August 2012.

4. A mixed methods approach was applied with the NACSAP II evaluation including key informant interviews with over 60 participants in Dar-es Salaam and in the regions (Dodoma and Morogoro); as well as Focus Group Discussions with participants including members of Anti-Corruption Clubs; Site visits to regions; review of project documents and web based research.

5. The evaluation outputs as provided for in the TOR included a preliminary findings report, followed by a draft and final report. Debriefing on preliminary findings with the main client the Prevention and Combating Commission Bureau (PCCB) and the key development partner the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) was part of the strategy to validate and clarify the findings in an effort to promote accuracy of interpretation and enhanced ownership and utility of the report. A workshop was envisioned for sharing the lessons learned was however waived due to constraints of time and the urgency of the report.

2 CSOs in this case includes non governmental organizations such as, private sector, community based organizations, and faith based organizations

1

6. The NACSAP II evaluation findings were assessed and reported against four evaluation criteria: (i.e. Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact).

Relevance: the NACSAP II reform programme was found to be highly relevant to the Government of Tanzania’s (GoT) national governance goals and reform agenda. The programme was also well aligned to the GoT’s commitment to good governance and declaration of zero tolerance for corruption. The NACSAP II was found to be relevant to UNDP’s vision in the area of partnerships;3

and to the UN agency’s commitments under the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). The programme was also found to be very relevant to other non state actors’ priorities including private sector, CSOs, CBOs and other international development partners who have an interest in promoting good governance and a corruption free Tanzania for ensuring a fair and competitive business environment and promoting harmonious social relationships with trust.

Effectiveness: The enhanced NACSAP was effective in achieving about 50% of its planned goals and activities with only approximately 14% of the total budget provided through the main development partner UNDP Tanzania. Effectiveness of the programme was however constrained by inadequate resources, slow funds disbursement, low quality of reports, ad-hoc planning and implementation and duplication of efforts by other development partners with state and non state actors. Overall however the NACSAP II’s achievements so far have been substantial albeit with funding limitations from government sources Since NACSAP II was mainstreamed, most government contributions to the programme (e.g. by NSC members, MDA and LGA partners) have been in kind in the form of fixed assets and staff time.4

NACSAP II was most effective in combating corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root causes5 through the conduct of a National Governance and Corruption Survey in 2009 that formed the basis for planning interventions of NACSAP II. Also, in strengthening anti-corruption mechanisms in all ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) and in introducing systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in local government authorities (LGAs).6 This was achieved mainly through establishment of integrity committees in MDAs and LGAs and in training provision. Also in establishment of anti-corruption clubs in tertiary institutions and in providing support to them. NACSAP II was highly effective in raising public awareness on anti-corruption7 through encouraging freedom of the media in reporting cases of corruption, providing them training in investigative journalism and in establishing hotlines for reporting cases of petty and grand

3 UNDAF 2007-20104 Follow up interview with GGCU on NACSAP II budget allocations by GoT, August 20125 Goal 1 of the NACSAP II6 Goals 2 and 3 of the NACSAP II7 Goal 6 of the NACSAP II

2

corruption by the general public. The evaluation team found a high level of awareness amongst the general public on anti-corruption efforts of the government and a generally free and open atmosphere and environment for raising complaints in public forums by FBOs, politicians and the general public without fear of intimidation.

NACSAP II was however least effective in mainstreaming and empowering the private sector into anti-corruption8 mainly due to non-performance of senior individuals associated with the specific partner institution identified, despite opportunities provided them through facilitation to attend meetings and conferences abroad to learn how to engage with the NACSAP II. The programme was also less effective in mainstreaming and empowering civil society organizations (CSOs) and other non state actors (NSAs) into the anti-corruption processes and in building synergy between NACSAP and legislative and judicial integrity programmes9 mainly due to conflicts and limitations in mandate and limited interface between NGOs, CSOs and state organs. For example, although CSOs can identify corruption issues, however the investigative authority on corruption is limited to PCCB therefore sharing information is key through more consultation, interface and synergies. The ineffectiveness of NACSAP in achieving synergies is also due to duplication of efforts and parallel funding sources and lack of harmonious reporting requirements by international development partners on similar activities. For example, donor funding of corruption perception surveys by several CSOs creates unhealthy internal competition and some levels of mistrust between state and non-state agencies that are counterproductive to the NACSAP II government reform programme. It was also largely ineffective in attracting direct financial support from other development partners mainly due to weak coordination between NSC members which impacted negatively on the achievement on its goal of enhancing the capacity of PCCB the Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to deal with corruption, manage and implement NACSAP10

Efficiency: Time, resources and human personnel contribute towards ensuring efficiency of development and reform programmes. The NACSAP was no stranger to effects of inefficiency starting with the slow disbursement of funds for planned activities that impacted on their timing and level of participation by target groups. Activities planned early in the year tended to be implemented late, hurriedly and in a crisis mode so as to meet timing deadlines for reports back to the development partner UNDP. This resulted in a lower level of participation due to late notice provision to stakeholders and strained relations between NACSAP Unit team and regional staff due to ad hoc planning and last minute demands on their time. Late approval of reports by the key development partner, blamed on poor quality reporting by the NACSAP Unit further exacerbated the

8 Goal 4 of the NACSAP II9 Goals 3 and 7 of NACSAP II10 Goal 8 of NACSAP II

3

situation contributing to increased inefficiency and compromising on the achievement of planned outputs. Poor coordination of NACSAP II reports and budgets by GGCU contributed to inefficiencies and delays in implementation. Duplication of efforts by development partners with some stakeholders of the NACSAP resulted in inefficient use of resources and encroachment into the time of the NACSAP II with other partners, further affecting efficiency.

Impact: Due to the absence of a programme or project document with a specific logic model showing measureable baseline data, targets, indicators and timeframes, it proved nearly impossible to accurately assess the impact of the NACSAP II. However proxy indicators were used based on interviews and reviews of Transparency International reports to try to assess the outcomes and contributions of the NACSAP II. The findings indicate that over the 2008-2011 period, Tanzania’s rating on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (TICPI) rose steadily and exceeded all other Eastern African countries with the exception of Rwanda. Our interviews with key informants suggest that the enhanced NACSAP contributed significantly to changed mindsets and increased intolerance for corrupt practices by politicians and members of the public. However this could not be accurately substantiated as the contributions of parallel programmes may have had some influence in the current status quo as well; making it near impossible without a control and experimental group to confidently attribute these changes solely to the NACSAP II. The potential for impact is however very great as far and wide reaching effects of programme interventions are usually felt years later and not necessarily immediately or concurrently with implantation. There is therefore reason to believe that NACSAP II through its efforts will has contributed to positive change in the corruption reform outcomes of Tanzania.

7. Conclusion: upon reviewing and analysing all the views and opinions of stakeholders the evaluation team has determined that the enhanced NACSAP was largely successful in contributing positively towards building capacity especially of MDAs and LGAs to address corruption, through the establishment of Integrity Committees. It also managed to achieve more than what the budget provided and therefore it demonstrated potential for future impact given the right amount of support. Several conflicts were however realized including the absence of laws such as the Right to Information Act and a national Whistle Blowers Act that are yet to be tabled before parliament and passed. These laws and Acts are key and instrumental to the achievement of NACSAP’s ambitious anti-corruption goals.

8. Lessons learned: several lessons were forthcoming from the evaluation, key amongst which is the poor coordination of the project by the GGCU and the negative impacts on the NACSAP II’s achievements and aspirations. Other lessons learned included the need to have relevant laws in place that are independent of any institution. Also the need to promote transparency and to implement the programme as far as possible even without adequate funds, by focusing and prioritizing specific

4

agreed actions. Others include the need to avoid parallel funding by international development partners and the need to come together in support of a national anti-corruption effort on a new platform to be overseen by a board with high level representatives from all stakeholder groups.

9. Recommendations: A list of over 30 recommendations is provided in the report. Key amongst the recommendations is the need to develop a new follow up programme focused on promoting transparency and doing business unusual. The need for the GoT to liaise closely with Non State Actors, especially private sector, NGOs, the media and ICT providers as well as the need to re-strategise and modify the NACSAP Unit for maximized benefits are highlighted. In addition, the recommendation to revise key legislation in order to help ease the work of the new programme will be instrumental to promoting its future success. Opportunities for development partners to liaise together for instance the UNDP –Tanzania together with the United Nations office for Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) in efforts to enhance collaboration, reduce duplication and competition and mange resources have also been discussed.

5

1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

1.1 DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC STATUS

1.1.1 The following table below briefly highlights the country the context within which the National Anti-Corruption Strategy Plan Phase II (NACSAP II) was implemented for five-years (2008-2011) in mainland Tanzania. The demographic and economic data presented below is from web-based sources and based on World Bank country studies and reports.

General Overview: Data and Statistics 11

Yr 2010

Population, total (millions) 44.8Population growth (annual %) 3.0GDP (current US$) (billions) 22.9GDP per capita (current US$) 524GDP growth (annual %) 7.0Life expectancy at birth, total (years) 57.4Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births) 60.2Literacy rate, youth female (% of females ages 15-24) 76.4Prevalence of HIV, total (% of population ages 15-49) 5.6Source: World Development Indicators

Human Development Index:At the start of the NACSAP II, Tanzania was rated a medium human development country, raking 152nd out of 182 countries with data. HDR 200912: 0.530, (“Medium” human development)Country Rank: 151st out of 182 countries with data. HDR 201113: 0.466, (“Medium” human development) Country Rank: 152nd out of 182 countries with data.

11 World Bank. Tanzania Overview: Data and Statistics. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/AFRICAEXT/TANZANIAEXTN/0,,menuPK:287361~pagePK:141132~piPK:141109~theSitePK:258799,00.html 12 UNDP. Human Development Index, HDR 2009: Tanzania (refers to 2007) http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_TZA.html 13 UNDP. Human Development Index, HDR 2009: Tanzania (refers to 2007) http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/countries/country_fact_sheets/cty_fs_TZA.html

6

1.2 THE NASCAP II REFORM PROGRAMME IN TANZANIA

Background

1.2.1 This report presents the summative, independent, evaluation findings of the enhanced, NACSAP II initiative, covering the four year period: 2008-2011. The independent evaluation was conducted in Tanzania, between February and August 2012. A team comprising two independent consultants, (i.e. Maureen Wang’ati-Team Leader and International Consultant and Ramesh Shah, PhD –Team Member, and National Consultant).

1.2.2 The National Anti-Corruption Strategy Action Plan - Phase II (NACSAP-II) is a locally owned, ‘home-grown’, Government of Tanzania (GoT) - led and driven initiative. It represents one of the five, core and cross cutting reform programmes of the GoT; it was generally designed to improve service delivery at the level of ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) and within local government authorities (LGAs). Other core reform programmes of with NACSAP II is a part include the:

a) Public Sector Reform Programme (PSRP), b) Legal Sector Reform Programme (LSRP), c) Local Government Reform Programme (LGRP)d) Public Financial Management Reform Programme (PFMRP).

Together, these reform programs were designed to support and facilitate sector development programmes and projects (SDPs) and to influence access and improvements in quality public services, especially by the poor.14

Justification

1.2.3 The NACSAP was formulated in response to findings and recommendations of a Corruption Validation Study that was commissioned by the GoT in 1996, immediately following the first multi-party elections in Tanzania. The Commission, led by Judge Warioba drafted a corruption findings report commonly known as ‘The Warioba Report’. The report singled out ‘widespread corruption as flourishing at all levels of the society, as rampant and a key impediment to the successful achievement of development and economic objectives by the Government of Tanzania. Negative impacts of corruption cited in the Warioba Report included a) massive economic losses from reduced government income, b) misappropriation of public assets; c) contribution to the breakdown in social infrastructure; and d) erosion of public trust and confidence in government, with particular attention to the judiciary and public administration. The NACSAP aimed to restore integrity in the management of public resources and national ethos.

14 Project Appraisal Document... for A Performance Results And Accountability Project in Support Of The Tanzania Public Service Reform Program (Apl), September7,2007 (Pg 3)

7

The Enhanced NACSAP

1.2.4 The first phase of the programme (i.e. NACSAP I) was implemented for five years, from 2000 to 2004, by the Government of Tanzania and several development partners. A new NACSAP Phase II programme was officially launched on 10th December 2006 as a follow up programme. However, upon its presentation to a wider stakeholder group, the strategy was found to be devoid of key implementing partners including non state actors (NSAs) such as the media, community based organizations (CBOs), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), faith based organizations (FBOs) and civil society organizations (CSOs). The NACSAP II strategy was therefore revised in 2007, with a view to improving its design, content and approach; build consensus on its goals and strategy under new changes taking place and to enhance its robustness, relevance and inclusiveness. A new enhanced NACSAP (Phase II) document was formally approved by the GoT as a strategic policy and action framework for preventing and combating corruption in the country for the period 2008-2011.15 The enhanced NACSAP included the expanded stakeholder group cited above and is the focus of this summative evaluation report. The evaluation was conducted starting in February 2012, two months following the end of the funding cycle in December 2011, therefore at the time of this evaluation NACSAP II was officially closed with the evaluation expected to inform the way forward.

Goals and Activities

1.2.5 NACSAP II formed the main vehicle for carrying out the aspirations of the Anti-Corruption Policy through its eight goals: to

1. Combat Corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root causes

2. Strengthen Anti-corruption mechanisms in all ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs)

3. Introduce systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in local government authorities (LGAs)

4. Mainstream and empower the private sector into anti-corruption

5. Mainstream and empower civil society organizations (CSOs) and other non state actors (NSAs) into the anti-corruption processes.

6. Raise public awareness on anti-corruption

7. Build synergy between NACSAP and legislative and judicial integrity programmes

15 The Enhanced National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP II) 2008-2011, (pages iii, iv)

8

8. Enhance the capacity of PCCB the Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) and the Direc-tor of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to deal with corruption, manage and implement NACSAP

9

Implementation arrangements

National Steering Committee

1.2.6 A National Steering Committee (NSC) comprising three key government institutions, several Non State Actors (NSAs) including NGOs, CBOs, Private Sector and Media representatives shared joint responsibility for and specific roles in the NACSAP II. The NSC’s mandate was to ‘give overall policy and strategic guidance to the NACSAP implementation.16’ Its members included:

Chair: Director General, (PCCB); appointed by the GoT and whose main role was to oversee implementation of NACSAP II in 21 regions of mainland Tanzania.

Coordinator: Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) whose main responsibility was to coordinate the NACSAP II activity through the analysis of NACSAP II reports from MDAs and LGAs. Other duties of GGCU included the preparation of summary and briefing reports on progress, outcomes and impacts of the NACSAP II; submission to these reports to the Chief Permanent Secretary who would then forward to the highest government office (i.e. H.E. the President of Tanzania). GGCU’s role was to also carry out periodic monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities on NACSAP II to track progress, outcomes and impacts of the initiative in achieving its stated goals;

Director ,Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) –whose main role was to support the programme by coordinating criminal investigation and intelligence, provide advisory services on criminal matters and under the constitution section 9, 11 and 12, to prevent and combat corruption.

Focal Point of the Governance Working Group- United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) The UNDP Tanzania responded positively to a request by the GoT for support to the NACSAP II. UNDP also consulted with other development partners engaged in NACSAP I with the hope of meeting a budget expectation of eight- million US dollars through a donor basket fund similar to that which characterized the first phase. However despite that additional interest and financial support was not forthcoming, UNDP remained as the primary development partner of the GoT’s NACSAP II initiative. Other state, non-state actors and development partners were represented and actively engaged in the enhanced NACSAP Phase II through their attendance and contributions at periodic NSC meetings and the annual National Anti-Corruption Forum. They include the: Media Council of Tanzania, the Ethics Secretariat, Tanzania Private Sector Foundation, other interested development partners of the GoT such as DFID, SIDA-Sweden, and the NGO community represented by the Tanzania Anti-Corruption Coalition Network (TACN)17.

16 The Enhanced National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP II) 2008-2011, (pages 14)

17 See Annex 2 List of agencies and institutions represented at NACSAP NSC meetings (2008-2011)

10

NACSAP Unit

1.2.7 A separate programme management unit (PMU) - the NACSAP Unit- managed its day to day operations and implementation arrangements. The Unit which is hosted at the PCCB Head Office in Dar-es-salaam has 11 officers dedicated solely to the programme18. Staff include a programme manager, a programme coordinator, nine goal coordinators and nine zonal officers who were responsible for implementation of seven out of eight NACSAP II goals, at Ministry Department and Agency (MDA) and Local Government Agency (LGA) levels in Tanzania. Their role on the NACSAP II was to liaise with PCCB Bureau chiefs and zonal coordinators based within the institution’s twenty-five regional offices country-wide19 PCCB’s own staff including district Bureau Chiefs, the Director of Research, the Director of Monitoring and Evaluation, the Chief Accountant and others also helped to implement and monitor NACSAP II activities at the district and local government (LG) levels. Goal number 1 of the NACSAP II focused on combating corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root causes. The Director General (DG) PCCB who was also the appointed Chairperson to NACSAP II had overall responsibility for this goal.

Funding arrangements

1.2.8 UNDP Tanzania, the key development partner contributed approximately 1.8 billion Tanzania Shillings20 or about 1,157,705.228 USD21 to NACSAP II activities over a four year period (2008-2011). The amount expended by UNDP on NACSAP II over the four year period was however significantly lower than anticipated: 14.4% of the proposed UNDP Tanzania budget originally projected at 12.56 billion Tz sh or about 8 million USD. UNDP Tanzania has remained a key,significant partner and supporter of the Tanzanian government’s good governance reform agenda since NACSAP’s inception in year 2000.22 Other development partners who supported the first NACSAP Phase I (i.e.: Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden did not fund NACSAP II. However, some countries (e.g. Sweden) contributed albeit indirectly to the NACSAP II through un-earmarked funds managed by the United Nations Development Assistance Programme (UNDAP). Sweden for instance contributed 30 million Swedish Kroner (about 4 million USD) to the UNDAP- a new UN development framework initiated in Tanzania

18 NACSAP II is referred to as one of the core reform programmes of the GoT, thus the use of this term in the report. 19 PCCB Offices in Tanzania: Mwanza, Dar es Salaam, Kinondoni, Ilala, Temeke, Arusha, Dodoma, Iringa, Kigoma, Kagera, Kilimanjaro, Manyara, Lindi, Mara, Mbeya, Morogoro, Mtwara, Pwani, Mwanza, Rikwa, Shinyanga, Singina, Ruvuma, Tabora, Tanga, 20 Source: Chief Accountant’s Report (PCCB)21 http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert/?Amount=1800000000&From=TZS&To=USD22 Source: Official- UNDP-Tanzania

11

on 1st July 2011. Funding levels by the GoT to NACSAP I could however not be confirmed with any accuracy by the evaluation team as it was mainstreamed into the MDA budgets.

2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

2.1 DATA COLLECTION, TOOLS, INSTRUMENTS

2.1.1 The choice of evaluation methodology was well considered by the independent consultant team and further discussed and agreed with UNDP Tanzania-the contracting agency and PCCB- the client. The final decision on methodology was influenced by several factors including cost efficiency and effectiveness, (i.e. funds, time and resources available); sources of evaluation information (qualitative and quantitative); knowledge of and accessibility to key informants according to their role and engagement with the enhanced NACSAP; how the findings would be utilized and the evaluation reporting mechanisms through briefing meetings, a lessons learned workshop23 and through written draft and final reports.

2.1.2 A mixed methods approach was proposed in the TOR and also by the consultants in an inception report that included sample data collection instruments and tools such as questionnaires, interview guides and checklists. The proposed approach included a cyclical analysis with reference to stages in the project cycle. It also employed techniques of triangulation of various data sources in a bid to promote accuracy of interpretation, to enhance the comprehensiveness of data capture and to promote the validity of findings for this complex, evaluation with national coverage. The overall purpose of the methodology was to equip the National Steering Committee (NSC) members and the Government of Tanzania and Development Partner with relevant information and practicable recommendations for decision-making about the way forward following the end of the NACSAP II funding cycle in December 2011.

2.1.3 The main data collection activities of the evaluation involved qualitative methods such as in-person interviews, round table meetings and follow-up telephone discussions, with over 60 key informants in 79 interviews24 representing NSCs, MDAs, LGAs, NSAs, UNDP and other development partners. Site visits were conducted by the consultants in Dar es Salaam, Dodoma and Morogoro.25 Quantitative data gathering methods mainly included review and analysis of programme documents, and web based research and analysis.

2.1.4 Data collection instruments were originally designed, proposed and approved at the inception stage. The purpose of these tools was to ensure coverage of variables of interest as presented in the evaluation Terms of Reference (TOR) and to ensure a coherent process and detailed information which would be useful for informing management and stakeholders about NACSAP II’s performance: (i.e. its main achievements, and challenges, key lessons learned and practicable action points: (i.e. stakeholders’ suggestions and the

23 The planned workshop was however waived eventually due to constraints of time.24 Some interviewees were seen more than once25 See full list of participants in Annex 2

12

consultants team’s recommendations on the proposed way forward on the Government of Tanzania’s reform programme). The tools were later adapted to the reality on the ground when it became evident that there was no linear way to propose questions or receive responses on the NACSAP II. Instead, information was sourced using semi-structured tools such as interview guides and checklists focusing on the TOR questions, to focus the evaluation and ensure comprehensive coverage of variables of interest.26

26 See inception report on data gathering instruments

13

14

Text Box 1: Summary of evaluation methods applied to the NACSAP II:

1. Review and analysis of key documents: NACSAP implementation report, NACSAP progress reports, National Governance and Corruption Survey, National Household Surveys, development policy and strategy papers, PRSPs, medium-term expenditure frameworks (MTEF), national social/economic survey reports, poverty assessment reports, NACSAP II M&E Framework, etc

2. Information/data gathering through structured/semi-structured interviews with UNDP Country Office (CO) and with key national officials responsible for the NACSAP. These include the Country Representative, the Country Director, Deputy Director, Governance Advisor. Also with Ministries Departments and Agencies such as the Legal Sector Reform Programme, the Commission of Human Rights and Good Governance, and others also through a summary goal status sheet for each goal providing in-depth analysis on the progress so far with goal achievement and activity implementation by the NACSAP Unit.

3. Focus group discussions with Anti Corruption Club members including the anticorruption club leaders, and members.

4. Round table meetings with NACSAP II stakeholders including the Ethics Secretariat Director and staff, Reform Coordinators, integrity committee members in the regions, municipal council directors and staff, Research on Poverty Alleviation (REPOA), Tanzania Private Sector Foundation.

5. Debriefing meetings with UNDP Tanzania CO and PCCB to share findings of the preliminary findings report. The purpose was to validate and clarify the provisional findings and to source additional information and supporting documents in an effort to promote understanding, accuracy of interpretation and reporting of evaluation findings by the consultant team. This was key for enhancing both the ownership and utility of the report for both the GoT and development partner-UNDP.

6. A lessons sharing workshop planned with stakeholders was waived due to time limitations.

2. NACSAP II EVALUATION FINDINGS

The findings of the NACSAP II evaluation are presented below in accordance with the evaluation Terms of Reference (TOR) requirements.27 The findings are categorised according to evaluation criteria which are not however mutually exclusive variables. The criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact are both co-dependent and inter-dependent variables that influence and are influenced by their individual performance. For ease of reporting and clarity of findings presentation, however these criteria have been agreed and adopted as part of the international evaluation reporting standards by OECD/DAC, USAID, the UN and other development partners. The consultant team has had opportunity to validate the preliminary and provisional findings through meetings with key stakeholders i.e. NSC members and UNDP. The following report therefore provides conclusive findings.

3.1 RELEVANCE

The evaluation TOR has provided the following guidelines for reporting on the relevance of NACSAP II: ‘Evaluate the logics and unity of the process in planning and designing the activities to develop the capacity of government and others to fight corruption and provide subsequent capacity building programs to anti-corruption awareness and efforts. The extent to which the design and implementation of activities was able to respond to and address:

The gaps identified in the evaluation of NACSAP I 2000-2004; Recommendations emerging from various corruption surveys and reports; The needs of the various stakeholders in addressing corruption at various levels; Relevance to National goals in governance and the fight against corruption, Acceptability and feasibility of activities for stakeholders for each component.

27 See Annex 6: NACSAP II Evaluation TOR

15

The relevance of NACSAP II is addressed in the following section:

3.1 Relevance to GoT’s national goals in governance and combating corruption

The NACSAP II was highly relevant to the Government of Tanzania’s (GoT) national governance goals and reform agenda. In particular the NACSAP is well aligned to the GoT’s commitment to good governance, declaration of and policy on zero tolerance for corruption. Tanzania like most African countries is faced with corruption in its public and private sectors that has assumed endemic proportions’28. In a recent speech at the opening of the International Association of Corruption

Authorities (IAACA), Executive Committee Meeting in Arusha Tanzania, His Excellency President of the United Republic of Tanzania, stated:

Cluster 3 of the Poverty Reduction Strategy for Tanzania otherwise known as ‘MKUKUTA’, propagates for good governance and accountability. The first presentation in the review was conducted by the Director General of the Preventing and Combating Corruption Bureau (PCCB). Combating corruption is a key element of Good Governance promotion. A non state actor and NACSAP II stakeholder described the link between poverty, politics and corruption in Tanzania in the following words: (See text box below)

28 The United Republic of Tanzania National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan for Tanzania, (November 1999, Pg. v)

16

Text Box 2

'While it is true that corruption is a global phenomenon occurring in almost all countries in the world, the problem is much more pronounced in some

countries than others but more complicated in developing countries. …with regard to Tanzania’s experience … we are not different from the situation in most developing nations that are at our level of development. Therefore, the resolve to prevent and fight corruption has not been spared of the challenges facing developing countries although our concerted efforts are now bearing

fruits”.

(H.E Dr. Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, President of Tanzania)

The launch of the enhanced NACSAP Phase II in December 2006 was preceded by a consultative process that engaged various stakeholders in discussions, with the purpose of addressing corruption through a wholistic approach. Tanzania was ranked number one amongst East African nations on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (TICPI) for 2008. This achievement was reflected by recent positive progress in tackling cases of grand corruption in Tanzania, yet despite serious challenges i.e.

The need for increased transparency and the right to information- with the GoT promising to ‘look into ways for further developing transparency through legislation, including Public Leadership Code of Ethics Act, Political Parties Financing Act and Right to Information Act’.

The need for joint action by all stakeholders including the GoT, Non State Actors (media, NGOs, private sector, learning institutions), and development partners on legal issues, development of a monitoring and evaluating framework, joint planning, capacity strengthening of key anti-corruption institutions and dialogue strengthening mechanisms29

The need to process and customize Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) findings to reflect local conditions in Tanzania.

Rwanda’s ranking on the TI-CPI has however since surpassed that of Tanzania for the period which offers another challenge for Tanzania to work hard to regain and retain its former number one regional ranking.

Figure 1: Tanzania’s TI-CPI ranking compared to EAC members (2008-2011) 30

29 URT General Budget Support Annual Review (2008) Final Report http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTANZANIA/Resources/GBS_AR08_report_Final.pdf

17

Text Box 3

“It’s (corruption) more pronounced and more problematic in a poor country. You may ignore it in a developed country, but corruption denies resources to a group of people.. and it also dehumanizes. It’s easy for people to lose faith in their own government with widening gulfs between the ‘haves and have nots’. Even if you have earned your wealth legitimately, people will suspect you of being corrupt. You cannot in my personal view discuss corruption outside the social and political view of the country it’s embedded in. It’s the same in Kenya and Uganda- Rwanda is more ruthless. In governance, one of the tenets-basic rule of law is to look at a wealthy person and assume that they are guilty. If you drive a good car or live in a good house in Tanzania people say ask: ‘how is it that we cannot have three meals a day yet this person can have all this?’.”

(NSA respondent-Academia)

3.1.2 Relevance to various stakeholders needs in addressing corruption at various levels

UNDP and UNDAF

The NACSAP II is well aligned to UNDP’s vision in the area of partnerships.31 The United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) was designed with focus on support to the implementation of the National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP/MKUKUTA) of 2005-2010 for Mainland Tanzania, and the Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (ZSGRP/MKUZA) of 2006-2010 for Zanzibar. Most relevant to the NACSAP II is UNDP’s focus on Cluster 3 of Mkukuta, which addresses good governance and accountability where anti-corruption efforts are key to promoting the achievement of its objectives.

30 Source: Wikipedia, Corruption Perception Index: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index#Rankings

31 UNDAF 2007-2010

18

Table 1: UNDAF’s response relative to the national governance action plan and priorities of Tanzania 32

Cluster I: Growth and Reduction of Income Poverty

MKUKUTA: Broad based and equitable growth is achieved and sustained.

MKUZA: Pro-poor growth achieved and sustained

Cluster 2: Quality of Life and Social Well Being

MKUKUTA: improved quality of life and social well-being with particular focus on the poorest and most vulnerable groups; and reduced inequalities (e.g. education, survival, health) across geographic, income, age, gender and other groups.

MKUZA: Improved social well-being and access to quality services with emphasis on the poor and most vulnerable groups

Cluster 3: Good Governance and Accountability

MKUKUTA: good governance and the rule of law is ensured; leaders and public servants are accountable to the people through the effective reduction of corruption and public access to information; democracy and political and social tolerance are deepened; peace, political stability, national unity and social cohesion are cultivated and sustained.

MKUZA: A society governed by the rule of law and government that is predictable, transparent and accountable

UNDP’s current Programme in Tanzania focuses on four practice areas; the first of which is most relevant to NACSAP II:

a) Governance - US$12,801,00- 32% of programme budget (2009)-highly relevant to NACSAP.

b) Pro-poor and wealth creation - including MDGs: US$10,271,00- 25% of programme budget (2009): Has two components- Promoting inclusive Growth, Gender Equality and MDGs (71% of budget 2009, somewhat relevant to NACSAP; and Mitigating the impact of AIDS on human development (29% of the budget 2009, not so relevant to NACSAP).

c) Environment and Energy - US$6,537- 16% of programme budget (2009)- Highly relevant to NACSAP as anti-corruption efforts need to consider environment and energy (93%) and expanding environment and energy services to communities (7%).

d) Crisis prevention and recovery - (8%)-highly relevant to NACSAP II

United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC)

Local commitment to the fight against corruption is evidenced through the GoT’s and 117 other states’ ratification of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), which came into force in 2005. The UNCAC recognizes that ‘Corruption represents a threat …to the stability and security of societies, undermining the institutions of democracy, ethical values and justice and jeopardizing sustainable

32 Annex 5 See UNDP GAP details

19

development and the rule of law’. It provides a set of internationally agreed benchmarks to reduce corruption, addressing prevention, criminalization, law enforcement, international cooperation, asset recovery, and technical assistance.

Relevance to General Budget Support (GBS) Review and Mkukuta II

Good governance, and in particular achievements in the fight against corruption are key to effective General Budget Support (GBS). Two specific questions were important for the overall performance of Mkukuta Cluster 3;

a. Are good governance and the rule of law ensured?

b. Is Government accountable to the people?

The GBS review in 2008 acknowledged progress and discussed the challenges and impediments to combating corruption in Tanzania. The review addressed progress in implementation and cohesion across the core reform; getting pay and allowances right in order to attract and retain human resource in the public service and ensuring that those resources are directed at the areas of greatest need; increasing citizens’ access to information and upholding Tanzania’s reputation for a free media. These questions and challenges were openly discussed in a key issue session during the 2008 GBS Review.

Overall, the NACSAP strategy and action plan enjoys full ownership by the Government of Tanzania’s head of state and civil service, as it was designed and implemented following recommendations from a validation exercise on the status of corruption in Tanzania by the Warioba Commission that was appointed by the former president of Tanzania, H.E Benjamin Mkapa. The Commission was chaired by a former Prime Minister and respected, senior Judge, Mr. Joseph Warioba as Chair of the Presidential Commission against Corruption (PCAC). The Warioba Commission -as it was popularly referred to-started its work on 17th January 1996. It reviewed statutes, rules and procedures in government and identified loopholes for corruption growth. Its work was concluded on 7th December of the same year, with a findings report confirming the existence of rampant corruption of two types: i) petty corruption (bribery) in the social services delivery sector, by some public servants as a way of ‘making ends meet’ (i.e. substituting their meager salaries) and ii) grand corruption involving high level public servants in their greedy pursuit of wealth. To address the negative effects of corruption, the Warioba Commission proposed that a sector-wide strategy and action plan be developed to address the loopholes for corruption growth as part of comprehensive recommended action.33 As a Government of Tanzania reform programme with focus on improving service delivery at MDA and LGA level, the NACSAP both phases I and II addressed the two types of corruption -petty and grand-identified by the Warioba Commission Report.

The NACSAP II remains relevant today; as a respondent with a Local Government Authority stated:

33 Annual Report on the State of Corruption in Tanzania 2002 (Chapter 1)

20

‘NACSAP II is a very good policy because the issue of corruption in Tanzania is becoming a problem. This enables the stakeholders to come together to address the problem of corruption. The MDAs normally

don’t consider the problem as theirs they see it as a PCCB problem. With NACSAP the government ensures that MDAs and Local Authorities sit down and address problems in their own house instead of

waiting for the neighbor to come and clean up the mess’. (LGA respondent)34

3.1.3 Relevance to NSAs

Most NSAs representing the CSO and NGO stakeholders expressed awareness about the existence of NACSAP II. However NSAs from some sections of media and private sector, especially those based outside of Dar es Salaam in the regions visited by the consultants (i.e.: Morogoro and Dodoma) seemed less aware about the existence of NACSAP II, in particular some sections of media and civil society. Other stakeholders representing private sector in the regions could not comment on the NACSAP II’s relevance to Tanzania as they were also reportedly unaware about its purpose and mandate. Anti-corruption clubs in the regions visited were mainly aware about the existence of PCCB rather than the NACSAP II. One respondent representing academia however clarified that although he was also unaware about the NACSAP II -until he was invited to participate in the evaluation- his brief familiarization with the NACSAP II document showed that it had good and noble intentions and therefore his non-participation in the NACSAP did not however minimize its importance in the fight against corruption.

The relevance of the NACSAP II in the view of other development partners (DPs) such as the World Bank, Embassy of Sweden and DFID is however limited. Whilst they acknowledged the national strategy, however most chose not to support it financially due to conflicting perceptions about its mandate, capacity and commitment to results with clear linkages between the action plan, strategy, and logic: inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts and focus on shortcomings as identified in the corruption survey. They appeared to have some reservations about the real intentions of NSC meetings which were viewed in some quarters as mere formalities, rather than as real opportunities for engagement.

Perception, whether based on factual or non-factual information seems to have played a major role in shaping other DPs views about the NACSAP II. For instance, there is evidence from NACSAP II of programme documents including NSC meeting minutes and attendance records confirming the timing of meetings and attendance by some DPs. Representatives from all stakeholder groups have attended the meetings including NSAs. Likewise, during the National Anti Corruption Forum (NACF), representatives from the wider stakeholder group attended and presented their progress reports on implementation. The National Anti-Corruption Forum Report is prepared based on the annual meeting outcomes. However

34 The identities of all participants is included in the list of respondents in the Annexes, however their views are not associated with any quotations for the purpose of protecting their privacy and ensuring confidentiality.

21

some development partners indicated that they were taking a ‘wait and see’ approach before deciding on how to support the government of Tanzania in its fight against corruption-a vice that is equally of high interest to them.

Relevance to recommendations emerging from various corruption surveys and reports; and to gaps identified in the evaluation of NACSAP 1

The NACSAP II addressed recommendations emerging from various perception surveys and reports and specifically the National Governance and Corruption Survey (1999). Conclusions and follow up actions of this survey recommended strengthening of capacity of various organizations involved in the effort, through a five-strand approach. This approach was focused on improving performance in public institutions, through forming ties with media and CSOs, controlling inflation and improving tax collection systems while intensifying its ability to recover money stolen through fraud and embezzlement. It also included objectives to conduct research in high risk areas prone to corruption through its ambitious goals. By strengthening collaboration with all stakeholders, especially non state actors (i.e. Faith Based Organizations (FBOs), media, CSOs and NGOs) in fighting corruption, and promoting measures to increase awareness about corruption, its causes and consequences the NACSAP II addressed recommendations of the survey. The NACSAP II’s aspirations were relevant to the survey recommendations to improve governance and the capacity of law enforcement agents including the courts, police and PCCB to fight corruption by addressing root causes such as delays in effecting justice, and the cost of accessing justice.

3.1.3 Acceptability and feasibility of activities for stakeholders for each component.

Relevance of NACSAP II goals and activities were assured through a consultative process effected by the DG -PCCB, with key stakeholders. For example, private sector stakeholders were invited to propose activities that were feasible for them. The same process was initiated with other NSAs and trainings provided even to media on investigative journalism and reporting in order to help them develop acceptable and feasible activities for their participation in the NACSAP II. Integrity committees in LGAs and MDAs were formulated, trained and helped to design feasible and acceptable activities for their engagement, with assistance from the NACSAP Unit goal coordinators.

22

3.2 EFFECTIVENESS

The NACSAP II evaluation sought to determine the extent to which activities yielded expected outputs at component level while contributing to the realization of the strategic thrust - namely:

Concerted government, civil society, private sector, development partner approach Continual strengthening of the laws that relate to corruption and public accountability Increase public awareness of anticorruption Enforcement of anticorruption laws including prosecutions, punishments and the recovery of

assets acquired through corrupt practices Improve and strengthen public service delivery Strengthen oversight and watchdog institutions Foster transparency, integrity and accountability in the conduct of public affairs Widen the scope of public awareness and prevention by empowering non-state actors – private

sector, NGOs, civil society organizations and the Media – both legally and operationally -- to participate effectively in the fight against corruption.

The following are the overall findings on NACSAP’s effectiveness:

3.2.1 Effectiveness in improving and strengthening public service delivery, through fostering transparency, integrity accountability in the conduct of public affairs

Overall, the evaluation findings indicate that NACSAP II has been largely effective in strengthening public service delivery, transparency and accountability in the conduct of public affairs. This has been mainly through instituting anti-corruption mechanisms in MDA and LGAs-Municipal Councils, through the formation and training of Integrity Committees. The Chairperson-DG PCCB has taken the lead through the 25 plus regional offices and the NACSAP Unit management to ensure that this important anti-corruption mechanism is introduced and supported to achieve its objectives as far as possible. UNDP’s has strong working relations with the Government of Tanzania based on mutual respect and trust. This has helped to foster the development of ICs which fall under NACSAP II Goals 2 and 3, by funding trainings in MDAs and LGAs.

Of the total number of IC members (159) targeted to receive training in MDAs through 32 training sessions planned between 2009, however only 19 training sessions were successfully conducted according to the Goal 2 report. Provisional estimates on the number of MDAs trained stand at about 94 which represents about 60% of the total targeted- assuming approximately five MDAs represented per training session over the five-year NACSAP implementation period.35 The findings on trainings conducted for ICs 35 See Annex 4, Goal 2 (line 1)

23

at LGAs indicate that ICs were introduced in all 133 LGA councils targeted representing achievement of 100% on this target. Of the 532 LGA members targeted, 753 members were trained including 497 IC members as well as 129 LGA Directors and 127 IC chairpersons.36 A key reason cited for the lower level of trainings achieved by the NACSAP II include the lower budget availed to the programme coupled with late disbursement of funds by the main development partner UNDP Tanzania- reportedly up to three months late. This affected the ability of the NACSAP Unit to achieve planned results according to the annual work plan because of the late notice provided to trainees which negatively affected their availability at short notice. However the UNDP Tanzania noted that the delay in funds disbursement for NACSAP II activities were mainly due to similar delays in the submission of progress reports by the NACSAP Unit which when received were often of low quality. In the evaluation team’s assessment however, it’s evident that funding delays by the key development partner coupled with lack of a specific budget for NACSAP II by GoT contributed to reduced outputs by the NACSAP II, compromising its level of goal achievements by the end of the funding cycle in December 2011.

3.2.2 Effectiveness in strengthening oversight and watchdog institutions

The effectiveness of NACSAP II in strengthening oversight and watchdog institutions is generally weak. This includes support to the Integrity Committees that were formed as bodies with oversight and watchdog functions, even though they do not qualify specifically as watchdog institutions per se. The reportedly weak coordination and commitment of most Permanent Secretaries to supporting the work ICs and lack of follow up and reporting by the GGCU on reports by ICs created ineffective, toothless ICs that were merely a formality within most MDAs and LGAs in Government. Effectiveness of the ICs was similarly curtailed by inadequate follow up by NACSAP II unit officers and zonal coordinators on trainings provided to them to ensure training adoption, learning and information dissemination down the hierarchy to ward and village level. The performance of Integrity Committees may be rated by the evaluation team as being dismal to fair based on several factors. This includes poor or inexistent mechanisms instituted for handling of complaints and inadequate follow up action by NACSAP Unit officers.

For example, of the 133 follow up integrity monitoring meetings planned with ICs at LGAs, only 69 (51%) were held within the period.37 The reasons cited for this situation include capacity constraints as well as financial constraints on the NACSAP II caused by slow disbursement of funds for activities and skeleton NACSAP Unit staff. Vividly lacking amongst the IC members that we visited is morale and ‘drive’ to carry out their mandates which includes reporting. IC members are nominated by their supervisors to their functions which they take on as additional to their current TORs, however with neither a revision of their job descriptions nor additional remuneration nor formal recognition. Most IC

36 See Annex 4, Goal 3 (lines 1,2) note: figures are yet to be confirmed to ensure there is no double counting37 Annex 4, Goal 3 (lines

24

members are nominated based on their own personal demonstration of integrity, however this is not always the case and some IC members have been accused of being corrupt individuals with low moral standing. Understandably, without any formal recognition or remuneration for the extra duties, nomination to IC positions may be viewed as punitive making many members unhappy and even ‘bitter’ about having to take up these additional duties that are viewed by many as burdensome and isolating from other staff members who may see them as or informants working on behalf of the PCCB. A cause for concern is the fact that ICs effectiveness is further thwarted by lack of follow up training by NACSAP Unit staff. Many of the IC members that we spoke to had only received training once as far back as two years previously with no follow up support. Adding to the complexity of their role is the fact that funding for their activities is basically non-existent at MDA and LGA level despite their repeated requests for additional support. When asked about the monies available for Objective B- addressing anti-corruption activities- none of the IC members expressed any knowledge about this facility. It appears that this important factor: sourcing of funding for IC activities is missing from the training curriculum offered by the NACSAP officers.

The NACSAP II’s effectiveness in strengthening other watchdog institutions such as the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance, and the Controller and Auditor General’s Office, is limited by NACSAP’s own objectives which were mainly focused on prevention rather than on prosecution. The PCCB as the hosting institution has limited mandate on prosecution while this is a function of the DPP. However the limited number of cases that are accepted by the DPP’s office from PCCB’s investigations and the high number of returns have compromised the effectiveness of the NACSAP II as a reform programme due to the continuing time lag by the DPP in prosecuting cases that extend to several years.

Even more concerning is that the effectiveness of these institutions has in fact reportedly decreased significantly as for example whereas before they used to handle a lot of complaints up to 28,000 annually today, they only handle about a quarter of these about 7,000 signifying a 75% reduction. Compared to the total potential Tanzanian population of 30 million people in all the regions Zanzibar, Mwanza, Lindi and Dar as people don’t know where to go. Other reform programmes send these watchdog institutions to visit the prisons where they used to receive a lot of complaints now they are decreasing because article 130 and sub article 1 on sensitization and awareness is not being carried out due to lack of adequate funds for mobilization of vehicles and facilitation of drivers and staff from watchdog institutions. Yet there is a need to address issues when they are ‘hot’ otherwise there is a risk of missed opportunity relegating important matters of corruption to history. Watchdog institutions indicated that they have been unable to follow up recent incidents reported in the newspaper including human rights violations of life threatening nature due to inadequate financial resources.

The sometimes lower caliber of individuals appointed by MDAs to attend NACSAP II NSC meetings has affected the quality of information exchange, information sharing and institutional memory at MDAs as officers are transferred, replaced, have sporadic attendance. This according to NACSAP Unit

25

management, ICs interviewed, and MDA and LGA representatives has had a serious effect on the NACSAP II implementation further impacting negatively on its achievements.

3.2.3 Increasing public awareness about corruption

As stated in the previous section, the NACSAP II has been successful overall in setting up ICs at MDA and LGA level. However most IC members lack the capacity to undertake their mandate which has impacted negatively on their morale and commitment, affecting their future sustainability and functionality following initial high training investments. Several issues for non-reporting or late submission of reports were cited by Integrity Committee (IC) members. They include lack of harmonized reporting instruments: i.e. Kiswahili and English reporting formats differ while both must be submitted simultaneously, further overburdening the already strained IC members with repetitive and burdensome reporting requirements. Additionally reports by ICs are delayed mainly because they have nothing to report as they are not facilitated financially to follow up on their training of trainer and programme monitoring functions outside. There is a problem of mobilization where IC members cannot follow up on calls outside the office to address concerns about the implementation of government projects, hampering their efforts to deal effectively and efficiently with complaints at the village and ward levels. This also affects their ability to increase public awareness about corruption at grassroots level where the public majority citizens reside. The work of ICs is an additional task that is neither required in their TORs nor recognized, rewarded, compensated or funded. They are not obligated to perform this function according to their job descriptions and neither NACSAP nor PCCB, the key implementer have the mandate to require IC members to perform their respective functions and submit reports. This brings to light the design of the NACSAP II and expectations which although have good intentions are lacking infrastructural, legal and financial backing to ensure effectiveness. The eight NACSAP goals are therefore dangerously over-ambitious under the financial and capacity circumstances and need to be reviewed in future against the backdrop of ‘on the ground reality, capacity and mandate’.

Scientific studies to better understand corruption effects implemented through Goal 1 of the NACSAP II may have increased the government of Tanzania’s effectiveness in stemming corruption in public pro-curement. PPRA and PCCB signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to cooperate in pre-venting, detecting and investigating corruption in public procurement. Through this MOU, 48 PCCB staff (investigators) were trained on public procurement procedures. 99 procurement audit reports were submitted to PCCB for scrutiny on possible corruption/fraud incidents. The audit reports included a scientific analysis of the corruption red flags in procurement processes. Dur-ing the procurement audits, a sample of 307 tenders were used to test the developed red flags un-

26

der the anti-corruption strategy. The high number, of “YES”s in the red flag checklist indicated a high possibility of corruption in the PE. Overall, the percentage of “YES”s for all the assessed PEs was on the lower side at 9.3%. The pre-bid phase was assessed to be the highest corruption risk phase with a percentages of “YES”s of 48%, evaluation and award phase 35%, and contract manage-ment phase 17%.38

3.2.4 Widening the scope of public awareness and prevention by empowering non-state actors – private sector, NGOs, civil society organizations and the Media – both legally and operationally -- to participate effectively in the fight against corruption.

NACSAP II has been effective in widening the scope of public awareness and prevention, by empowering youth through the establishment of anti-corruption clubs in secondary schools and tertiary institutions. This has been achieved in liaison with PCCB Bureau Chiefs and staff in the regional offices who share the same responsibility for this output in their job descriptions and reporting requirements to PCCB Headquarters. The measure of effectiveness is however difficult to establish as there neither exists any baseline data, indictors nor target figures against which the evaluation could make any comparative assessments and judgements. A visit to an anti-corruption club in the Dodoma region was however very revealing of the positive outcomes that can be achieved through dedicated support from PCCB regional offices with youth members of the anti-corruption clubs. One of the results immediately evidenced by the evaluation team was the open, free atmosphere in which students (mostly male) shared their views and opinions about corruption and their role in helping to stem the vice in Tanzania. Student members revealed that their anti-corruption clubs openly and frequently engage with PCCB and NACSAP staff in the regions. They have good rapport and extend invitations to the PCCB staff to attend and witness various events such as student graduations, special days and handing over of leadership as was the event that the evaluation team attended. The relationship between NACSAP II and anti-corruption clubs is fondly described by a club member as one of ‘brothers and sisters’. Below are other remarks that these youth shared at the consultation meeting with anti-corruption members in Dodoma.

“We discuss good governance, because we want to create a new generation of leaders in future…

“We would like every individual to ensure his / her contribution to corruption…

“The club is trying to fight corruption starting with our schools and educating students and others neither to bribe nor to receive bribes”

(Anti-Corruption Club Members-Tertiary Institution-Dodoma)

38 Report Of The Public Procurement Regulatory Authority On The Implementation Of The National Anti-Corruption Strategy And Action Plan (NACSAP II) (Source PPRA)

27

These comments indicate increased awareness and strong attitudes towards corruption amongst members.

3.2.4 Concerted government, civil society, private sector, development partner approach

The NACSAP II has however been somewhat less effective in realizing a concerted government, civil society, private sector and development partner approach. For example with media partners in the regions visited, members of a press club reported their attendance of two educational seminars in 2011, hosted by PCCB Bureaus and focusing on corruption and ways in which journalists can contribute to combating corruption. They were however still unaware about the existence of the NACSAP II despite confirmation of participation in PCCB hosted events such as tree planting during the anti-corruption week, where they were briefed on investigative journalism skills by the PCCB regional office. The press club members cited positive outcomes of trainings offered by PCCB during these events including increased knowledge about the need to respect ongoing processes by not publishing or interfering with ongoing investigations without enquiring from PCCB about their status. They however decried the challenges faced in receiving timely feedback from PCCB, citing bureaucracy which impeded their media reporting activities.

Similarly, the effectiveness of the NACSAP II seems to have been compromised by low capacity amongst the NACSAP II Unit staff. Key amongst which was the demonstrated inexperience with results based management, through non-existent monitoring and evaluation reports on the NACSAP-this, despite there being a framework in existence. Weak quality of reports as also determined by UNDP Tanzania, which cited this weakness was a key impediment to timely funds disbursement. Poor quality reporting is evidenced for instance in the following results statement: ‘Great achievements and changes have been visible in most MDAs especially on the issues of integrity. In February 2010 PCCB and PPRA signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) to cooperate with each other. The implementation have already started and together through NACSAP II trained 30 members of tender boards from ministries’39. This statement reveals a lack of clear understanding of what really should be termed as results as opposed to outputs of the NACSAP II. The change taking place should really be assessed and reported against the NACSAP II’s aspirations to influence how business is done in MDAs with the signed MOU and training of tender boards being only a means (output) and not an ends (outcome/impact) in themselves. The difficulty experienced by Zonal Coordinators in accessing quarterly reports from MDAs and LGAs and the inadequate level of detail in these reports and missing information in key columns (i.e. financial information and targets) once received, are a key concern that needs to be addressed going forward40.

Review of the NACSAP II strategy reveals challenges with coordination within the NSC membership, starting with the GGCU who is cited as the coordinator of the NACSAP II programme. Currently there appears to be some confusion about the roles of each party in the NSC as no clear MOU exists 39 NACSAP II Progress Report, January-December 2010 (page 8)40 See NACSAP Implementation Report as per M&E Framework 2009-2011-Matrix (Section B)

28

committing each partner to specific obligations and responsibilities on the NACSAP II. This has created space for ad hoc implementation with some overlapping roles and activities, resulting in duplication of efforts on the national reform programme. For example, the GGCU and PCCB both request for reports from MDAs. When each party receives these quarterly reports, they each prepare independent summary reports that are submitted in parallel upwards to the Chief Secretary at the State House. Similarly, duplication of roles is evidenced at the level of PCCB where the NACSAP II is hosted, with parallel implementation and reporting of certain activities (e.g. anti-corruption clubs in secondary schools and colleges and reporting on development projects). Initial findings from interviews suggest that a lot more has been done in the NACSAP II than was reported - a lost opportunity for the NACSAP II to report on its achievements. This situation which can be attested to the weak M&E and reporting system is reflected in the statement below:

“I’m sure much is being done through NACSAP than what is being reported. We report directly on trainings for religious and other leaders to the Directorate of Community Education, we might as

well also report to NACSAP” (PCCB Regional Officer)

Ineffective coordination by GGCU, whose duty it is to coordinate the NACSAP II programme yet with a skeletal staff of three individuals has greatly hindered the effective engagement of NACSAP II and coordination with MDAs, LGAs, and NSAs. This has also impacted on the quality of internal liaisons between NACSAP II Unit staff and PCCB- the hosting institution as well as between NACSAP Unit and members of the NSC (GGCU itself and DPP). As discussed above, the NACSAP unit’s own capacity is limited both in terms of human and financial resources for regional implementation especially outside of Dar es Salaam in the regions visited. In the evaluation team’s assessment, the opportunity to engage PCCB officers on the ground has been underutilised so far, thus compromising the quality and quantity of outputs and the overall programme effectiveness. Yet from our observations, PCCB seems to have one of the most developed human, and infrastructural capacity with geographical scope and reach in Tanzania as compared to all other anti-corruption institutions in Tanzania.Apart from the budgetary constraints, weak coordination has impacted negatively on the NACSAP II’s achievements based on NACSAP officers own reports41.

The NSC’s own effectiveness has been compromised by the lack of visibility and near absence of GGCU at field level especially despite being a key member and coordinator of the NACSAP II. In all regions visited so far including Dar es Salaam, the feedback from stakeholders was the same. No GGCU officer has ever been cited at MDA or LGA offices in the role of NACSAP II coordinator. It’s not immediately clear if this is a deliberate strategy or just an oversight and misunderstanding about the role of the GGCU, however what is clear is that the NASCSAP II is now viewed as a PCCB driven initiative only and not as a government initiative with wider stakeholder participation. This perception of the NACSAP has its benefits as well as disadvantages in ensuring the cooperation of all on the national reform programme. 41 See Annex 4 NACSAP Summary Tables on Goal

29

Some stakeholder groups may feel intimidated by PCCB’s own mandate as an investigation and prosecution arm of government that is dedicated by its Act to combat corruption through legal avenues. Others may not take the NACSAP II seriously because of the limitations of PCCB’s mandate through the PCCB Act as well as their own institutional legal mandates.

3.2.5 Continual strengthening of the laws that relate to corruption and public accountability. Enforcement of anticorruption laws including prosecutions, punishments and the recovery of assets acquired through corrupt practices

Conflicts in anti-corruption laws such as non-tabling of the Whistle Blowers Act and others may have had some negative impact on the level of reporting of complaints about corruption to the IC members at national and regional level. Most people fear that they would not be protected if they were identified as complainants, and therefore this may have had some role in reducing the number of complaints reported by IC members. Another potential deterrence to enforcement of anti-corruption laws including prosecutions, punishments and the recovery of assets acquired through corrupt practice is the lack of anonymous reporting facilities outside of Dar es Salaam in the regions that we visited specifically in Dodoma. The free anti-corruption hotline 113 for lodging of complaints by the public has been out of order for sometime there. While the PCCB hotline 113 may be working in some regions such as Dar es Salaam, our visit in Dodoma and Morogoro indicated that the hotline has been out of order for some time, and in its absence personal mobile numbers are used. Despite the opinion by some that seem to believe that lack of anonymous reporting facilities do not necessarily deter or hamper reporting on corruption by potential informants, the consultants have serious doubts which are supported by the evidence in terms of the low level of complaints reported from these regions.

Further clarifications that were sought on the matter through a briefing meeting with PCCB officers in Dar es Salaam led the consultants to the real reasons for the unavailability of hotline services in some regions of Tanzania. The 113 hotline service on mainland Tanzania is provided as a landline service by the Tanzania Telecommunication Commission. All phone calls through the hotline are routed through the PCCB HQ in Dar es Salaam as there is currently no possibility to route the calls through to individual offices in the regions. Two years ago, there was an effort to route landlines to regional offices, however there was a challenge as most users are members of the public in the regions who do not have access to landlines so they prefer to use their mobile handsets. Yet GSM providers such as Airtel do not consider this good business practice as it shifts the cost burden to them. Therefore it presents an effectiveness challenge when regional calls focusing on local problems are directed to the HQ. Most PCCB Regional Bureau Chiefs therefore prefer to give their mobile phone numbers to the locals for easier access. In addition, the effectiveness of the 113 hotline system is stifled and threatened by misuse of the free service by prank callers including children and others who use it to play games and hurl insults at PCCB. Needless to say this has proved to be very discouraging and demoralizing to the staff managing the lines because if 19 out of 20 calls are abuses most likely the 21st call will not be picked up.

30

31

3.3 EFFICIENCY

On efficiency of the NACSAP II, the evaluation sought to respond to the TOR’s questions on the economic utilization of resources including:

The efficacy of the planned activities within the time frame and budget for project implementation;

To what extent resources were used appropriately to produce the intended outputs; The extent to which project funds, expertise and time were used judiciously to achieve desired

project results.

3.3.1 The efficacy of the planned activities within the time frame and budget for project implementation;

Overall, only about half of planned NACSAP objectives were achieved by the end of the funding cycle in December 2011. This is an indication of inefficiencies with implementation and may also be a pointer to a much larger problem which is overambitious targets and objectives that are not cognizant of the existing staff and institutional capacities and mandates. It is clearly evident that the NACSAP II unit staff capacity is stretched. Tanzania being an expansive country means that it takes a very long time to move from one place to another. The geographical, logistical, capacity and time considerations of the programme should have helped to propose alternative implementation arrangements. These may include the use of PCCB staff in various regions as well as others from LGAs, as Tanzania with a population of over 40 million cannot be served efficiently by only 1,000 PCCB staff countrywide. Rather if the NACSAP was integrated and owned by more institutions then the country would have enough officers to implement and achieve its objectives more efficiently.

3.3.2 To what extent resources were used appropriately to produce the intended outputs;

The main issue regarding efficiency of NACSAP implementation has to do with the reportedly insufficient and/or late remittance of funds for NACSAP II initiatives. Reports by the NACSAP unit indicate that on several occasions, funds from UNDP were delayed by up to three-months while reports were due almost immediately following funds remittances in order to meet submission deadlines. This factor which was mentioned by several NACSAP goal coordinators and the manager contributed to inefficiencies in implementation, specifically inability to extend the full participation of targeted institutions and individuals, due to late notice and hurriedly implemented programming. This situation

32

was confirmed and reiterated at the debriefing meeting on preliminary findings with PCCB management and NACSAP Unit officials in Dar es salaam in August 2012.

3.3.3 The extent to which project funds, expertise and time were used judiciously to achieve desired project results.

A meeting discussion with the Chief Accountant PCCB on the NACSAP II budget revealed that the UNDP is the primary source of direct funding for the NACSAP II. The amount of funds budgeted for the project was originally about 12.5 Billion Tanzanian Shillings, assuming that UNDP and other partners would eventually contribute to the NACSAP II initiative over the course of the programme. However only about 1.8 Billion Tanzanian Shillings was eventually availed to the NACSAP II by UNDP while funds from other potential donors were not forthcoming. Despite mention at several meetings with GoT stakeholders of funding for the NACSAP under Objective B, the consultants could not however establish situation regarding the amount of government funds allocated to the NACSAP. According to the GGCU, there is no special budget or earmarked funds for the NACSAP II because it is mainstreamed into government activities including those of PCCB. The assumption therefore is that all MDAs and PCCB will contribute towards the NACSAP activities from their respective budgets. Asked if the NACSAP Unit was aware how much money was available to support its activities in MDAs and LGAs, the Director General PCCB who is also the NACSAP II Chair through the PCCB explained that he could not enquire from MDAs about the amount of funds available to the NACSAP II or to Objective B as this may be misconstrued as an investigative activity by PCCB on the amounts of money allocated for anti-corruption.

Table 1. Funds support by UNDP for the NACSAP II (2008-2011)

Month/Year Amount (Tanzanian Shillings)

Sept-Oct/ 2008. 520 million

2009 404 million

2010 375 million

October / 2010 350 million

2011 279 million

33

Total (As reported by the Chief Accountant) 1.8 Billion (estimated)

The initial assumption as regards the NACSAP II budget was that UNDP would receive additional contributions in a basket-fund as was the case during the NACSAP I. However instead of supporting the NACSAP II, other development partners chose to support government anti-corruption efforts through General Budget Support that is meant really to cater to deficiencies in the budget as a bridging mechanism. The Mkukuta Cluster 3 on governance is only addressing corruption in terms of prosecution and court cases and not on prevention as is the NACSAP II’s focus. In addition to GBS, other development partners seem to have chosen to spend the time in support a proliferation of parallel programmes addressing corruption, such as Troiker Plus Plus, that meets periodically to discuss corruption issues. There is also the STACA programme supported by DFID and including law enforcement institutions such as the Police, the office of the DPP, the judiciary, and the national audit office. The one outstanding question and main interest of the development partners is on the number of court appearances and prosecutions undertaken. However this has had a negative impact on the enhanced NACSAP budget and on time and human resource efficiencies as when attacking a ‘monster’ such as corruption with parallel interventions the danger is that one may not necessarily achieve their goals with the very diverse reporting and recognition mechanisms and requirements. The introduction of conditionality that imply that funds be allocated to specific kinds of results also hinders efforts by non-prosecuting agencies. This is due to the fact that there is compartmentalization of functions by the various actors: for example, PCCB is primarily responsible for investigations, the DPP is responsible for prosecution, and the courts conduct adjudication and sentencing. The functions of all these government departments are separate; they are not interrelated so all outcomes cannot be achieved by any one of them alone.

A similar problem of duplication of efforts has been evidenced with CSOs, some of whom are involved in Public Expenditure Tracking Systems (PETS) for which they apply and receive funds from various donors, creating duplication of efforts. Although CSOs may identify corruption cases, they have to pass on the mantle to PCCB that has the mandate to investigate the cases. However sometimes CSOs do not inform PCCB causing a missing link between CSO and the government strategy and approach in the fight against corruption. The enhanced NACSAP focused more on the Tanzania Anti Corruption Network (TACN) whom PCCB has helped to develop their strategy. So far TACN is working on getting funds from the Foundation for Civil Society. Another CSO, Haki ya Elimu for instance is funded by USAID so their focus is only on the education sector. Some CSOs are regional and work in TZ and other countries so the donor dictates the terms and conditions. Another example of overlaps and duplication of efforts is the Foundation for Civil Society that conducts perception surveys. The survey went public but not with a

34

bang perhaps because PCCB was conducting a similar survey so the CSO’s effort it did not get the impact it was expecting. Again this may be viewed as inefficient use of resources due to poor donor coordination. The GGCU has the mandate to coordinate the NACSAP II activities including its budget disbursements and reports from MDAs and LGAs However as coordination is a weakness of the NACSAP, the evaluation team was unable to conclusively evaluate the judiciousness of budget application to results realization ,as a clear results based management coordination and support structure applied to budget allocations and reporting were not evident.

3.4 IMPACT

The evaluation sought to respond to questions raised below in the TOR regarding impact of the NACSAP on:

Corruption at the ministries, departments and agencies of Government will be monitored and reported for appropriate actions to be taken.

Corruption within Local Government Authorities will be monitored and reported for appropriate actions to be taken.

With the establishment of Integrity Committees in a number of institutions including; MDAs, LGAs, Secondary Schools and tertiary institutions, and the engagement of civil society, the media and the private sector, Public Awareness will be greatly enhanced which will strengthen demand for domestic accountability.

The strengthening of the key anticorruption agencies including the PCCB and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution will enhance the capacity to investigate and prosecute petty or grand corruption cases.

The integration of NACSAP II with the other core reform processes will not only broaden the scope of coverage, but also widen and deepen the war against corruption.

Reduction of corruption, particularly in land administration and the areas that are rich for revenue collection namely, natural resources, tax collection and customs will enhance domestic resource mobilization for national development and reduce donor dependency.

Reduction of corruption in public service delivery will enhance efficiency and public trust in the government and civil servants.

The compliance by state institutions with the Public Procurement Act 21, 2004 will minimize if not eliminate corruption in public procurement and save funds for development.

As there was no operational project document type manual, the consultants could not accurately assess and report on the NACSAP II’s impact in areas identified in the TOR. Neither could the impacts be approximated because of the lack of an operational programme document with clear

35

baseline data, relevant indicators for measuring the change desired and specific targets and timeframes for achievement. Rather, there only exists a NACSAP strategy and action plan document with more general information on the strategic thrusts, goals and activities, of the project which is more process rather than results based. There only exists one M&E report on the enhanced NACSAP that was prepared by the Director of M&E for the period 2008-2011. This document is also process rather than outcome focused as it presents the status of activity achievement by goal rather than the results of these activities.

Efforts to describe potential impacts of the programme were however attempted by the consultant team based mainly on anecdotal rather than hard evidence from various interviews with key stakeholders and information from web based sources. The anecdotal evidence so far suggests that the NACSAP II strategy and efforts were most successful with government partners and less successful with NSAs especially private sector and NGOs. However the NACSAP seems to have had some positive impact in influencing youth’s perceptions about corruption though the anti-corruption clubs in schools and colleges. By far the most positive achievement of the NACSAP II has been the potential contribution to change in perceptions by the general public on the government’s and will to combat corruption. As demonstrated in the figures below:

Figure 2

GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE TI PERCEPTION INDEX FROM 1998 TO 2011

36

Source: PCCB- Tanzania

The above figure shows the rating of Tanzania on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (TICPI) over 12 years. The anecdotal evidence presented by this figure indicates that over the period of the enhanced NACSAP, the TICPI rating of Tanzania took an upward turn from 2008-2011sur-passing that of most Eastern African countries apart from Rwanda. This may be attributable in part to ef-forts by the NACSAP through Goal number 1, to increase awareness through the corruption survey and to address petty and grand corruption cases over the period. This however is yet to be substantiated. Inter-views with constitutional institutions such as CHRAGG support this finding as they give credit to the NACSAP for contributing to increased awareness amongst Tanzanians on corruption through increased reporting by the media, and training offered through the programme. The Tanzanian public are becoming more sensitized and aware of corruption. They are forming strong opinions against it, speaking freely without fear. They now hate it and want something done about it, which suggests that the programme may have had positive contribution towards addressing public apathy to corruption and increasing public in-terest and involvement. In some quarters, there have been changes in the mind sets of service providers in government institutions with improved service delivery resulting for example in the office of birth regis-trations as stated by a private sector stakeholder.

Figure 3: 2011 MO IBRAHIM PERCEPTION INDEX ON GOVERNANCE

RANK IN AFRICA

COUNTRY ( OUT OF 53 COUNTRIES IN AFRICA)

SCORE

37

1 Mauritius 82.5

2 Cape Verde 79.0

3 Botswana 76.1

4 Seychelles 73.5

5 South Africa 70.6

6 Namibia 69.7

7 Ghana 66.0

8 Lesotho 62.8

9 Tunisia 61.7

10 Egypt 60.7

11 Benin 59.9

12 Sao Tome and Principe 58.4 13 . . .

Tanzania . . .

58.1 . . .

20 Uganda 55.0

23 Kenya 52.6

25 Rwanda 51.7

25 Burundi 45.1

53 Somalia 07.9

Source: PCCB- Tanzania

The above figure confirms the high positioning of Tanzania in Eastern Africa on governance, rating it highest in the Eastern Africa region in 2011.

By and large there has been good progress by the reform programmes as a whole in tackling corruption. Just this year (2012), Tanzanians have witnessed a lot of attention on politicians focusing on fraudulent use of government funds. This resulted in the sacking of some ministers by the President, which is a direct result of a strengthened public financial management system strongly linked to accountability of the government.

However, weaknesses in the NACSAP II design and implementation that basically omitted awareness raising activities and funds allocation to ICs to extend their training and learning to members of the public at ward and village levels was a missed opportunity. Due to late disbursement of funds and inadequate

38

funding availability to the NACSAP the NACSAP II goals and activities could not be implemented in full with only about 14% of the total planned budget from UNDP Tanzania. Actual funding levels to NACSAP II from government sources could not be established accurately by this evaluation. Lack of shared ownership for the NACSAP II by all stakeholders may also have compromised its long term impacts in terms of concerted efforts in combating corruption by all relevant sectors of society.

While it’s notable that PCCB has taken the lead on the NACSAP II implementation, this has also had some negative repercussions on the burden of management and coordination that shifted to the DG PCCB who is also the Chair of the NSC by appointment of the Chief Secretary, GoT. Not only does he shoulder the responsibilities of the PCCB with its over 1,000 staff in 25 regions of the country he also is by default coordinating the NACSAP II government reform programme that is hosted at the PCCB Headquarters including implementation of its ambitious goals countrywide. He oversees implementation and coordination of the government reform agenda almost singlehandedly with support from NACSAP II management and staff who seem to have low capacity. UNDP-Tanzania Country Office has been a loyal funding partner of the NACSAP since its inception in 1999 and offered its support to the Chair. This situation may have contributed to a false perception of the DG PCCB acting in isolation on the NACSAP, whereas in reality, this is an artificial arrangement created out of necessity in order to fill a gap and wide space created by the lack of full engagement by the rest of the steering committee members notably GGCU that has a coordination role. The office of the DPP is also not visible as an NSC member of the NACSAP outside of the PCCB and UNDP. Their role in the programme is little understood and exposes other NSC members especially the hosting institution to negative criticism and disproportionate blame for NACSAP II challenges.

Poor or absent planning by the NACSAP Unit for activities and the nature of implementation in ad hoc fashion has not been well received by implementing partners, regional offices or other stakeholders including other DPs. Most of those consulted felt that the decision to conduct this or that activity was driven by ulterior motives and self interests rather than any specific strategic plan. For instance co-implementers in the regions visited complained that NACSAP II officers just call at anytime and with no prior notice, requesting them to set up meetings on their behalf with tens of stakeholders such as faith based or community organizations. However when NACSAP unit staff arrive in these regions they neither share their work plans and training content nor invite PCCB regional staff or NACSAP focal points in these offices to attend or co-facilitate the sessions in a bid to build their own capacity and learn from the process. However the problem with that approach is that when NACSAP officers leave, those whom they trained return to PCCB offices soliciting more help and information on how to implement what they learned. However the regional officers are powerless to help them because of their lack of capacity, skills and knowledge on the training content. Disjointed planning is evident from the failure of our team to get

39

any reference to planning documents from NACSAP goal coordinators. It’s also notable from the low level of information provided in their goal summary sheets as designed by the consultants.42

NACSAP II, despite having a revised strategy that incorporated other stakeholders such as NSAs has not effectively fulfilled its goals as envisioned. This has impacted upon its ability to attract, retain and sustain partnerships with media, CSOs private sector and other development partners. In each of the goals you will find that the main document that defines the relationship between the NACSAP and the partner was never developed; for example: e.g. Goal 3 ‘Introduce and encourage the use of whistle blowing and the hotline system’ and Goal 6 “Develop an effective and sustained public communication strategy for anticorruption to include the extensive use of the media”. Also despite that an elaborate M&E framework exists for the NACSAP II with clear guidelines, it has not been followed and never been applied to the programme. This unfortunately reflects a low level of commitment to results based management, which deters NSAs and development partners from effectively engaging with the programme because the baseline, targets and results are not known. Indeed most development partners interviewed made mention of the lack of focus on results as the predominant reason why they continue to not to engage with the programme as it seems not to be keenly committed to measureable results. The findings suggest that there may be overlaps and duplication of efforts between GGCU and PCCB on their respective functions in practice. There is also a problem of limited mandate as well as limited human resource capacity within the NSC membership. The role and functions of the DPP have not been fully felt within the NACSAP II implementation period.

Ineffective coordination is clearly one of the most evident and visible findings of the NACSAP II evaluation with negative impacts on the NACSAP II. Difficulties with coordination were highlighted as well as weaknesses with the NSC role in interviews with PCCB, GGCU, DPP, UNDP, and DPs. They were also evidenced through the findings of interviews with NSAs- many of whom felt left out of the NACSAP II process- also, the perceptions of MDA and LGA members who erroneously view the NACSAP II as a PCCB activity.

42 See Annex 4

40

CONCLUSIONS

The 1997 Warioba Report introduced many anticorruption and related changes. It induced the Public Sector Reform Programme [PSRP], Legal Sector Reform Programme [LSRP], Local Governance Reform Programme [LGRP], and Public Financial Management Reform Programme [PFMRP]. In 2001, the National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action [NACSAP] Plan was adopted.

PCCB is one of the few institutions with a “wide infrastructure”. It has offices all over Tanzania with well trained and experienced manpower compared to most other public institutions. While we learned that most NACSAP activities were run using UNDP funds, the “fixed” costs and in kind contributions of government through the PCCB need to be factored in through proper accounting. While training and communications through Integrity Committees were necessary, the concentration of NACSAP II should have focused beyond training and investigations, to include other activities involving other potential partners such as the TCCIA which is spread throughout Tanzania but with fewer trained staff/members. The establishment of GGCU was meant to elevate the discussion of corruption to a higher level but the leadership has been rather weak so far, creating a gap and missed opportunity.

4 LESSONS LEARNED

Lessons learned in promoting Impact of NACSAP II include the following:

a) Strengthening the Key Anti-corruption Agencies:-

Some of the core anti-corruption agencies include the PCCB, DPP and the police. It is very important that the investigating officers of the PCCB and DPP/Police are trained together on various aspects of corruption and money laundering. It is equally important that journalists are also trained on anticorruption investigations. They should also be allowed to investigate side by side with the PCCB and police/DPP where feasible as these agencies have the highest contribution in fighting corruption. It is important that the Integrity Committee officers in MDAs and LGAs are trained in the anti-corruption so that corrupt practice in these institutions can be reported and traced. Equally important is strengthening media, private sector and civil societies. Once trained, they can be one of the biggest potential contributors to the fight against corruption.

b) Integration of NACSAP II with other core reform programmes:-

One of the important core reform areas is in the laws of Tanzania

41

Laws that need to be repealed are for instance: .

-The National Security Act of 1970- Newspaper Act of 1976 [Law of Sedition – Sections 31-35, Law of Defamation Sections 38-47].- Official Secrets Act- Preventive Detention Act-The Public Service Act No 8 of 2002 [Cap 298 and Section 18[1][2][3] - The Tanzania Broadcasting Service Act of 1993 [Section 25]-Contradictory laws such as the Marriage Act -where underage girls are legally allowed to get married as minors at the age of 14 to 15 years- yet sexual relations with this group is considered an offence should be repealed.

Laws that need to be amended include:-

-Public Procurement Act – [to include anti-bribery and anti-corruption pact in the contract and bidders post sizable bonds, percentage calculated on the sum of contract which can be forfeited in the event of non-compliance] - The Public Leadership Code of Ethics Act No 13 of 199543

New laws that should be formed include: -Right to Information Act [as opposed to Freedom of Information Act]-National Whistle Blowers Act-Leadership and Integrity Bill [to also include declaration of interest, insistence on accountability, to avoid corruption and to follow transparency]-Formalize Open Budget Process [National and Government Budgets, training in Budget Analysis and Public Expenditure Tracking System.]-Gender, Children and Anti-Corruption Law [Gender and Children sexual exploitation-employments, promotions, anti-trafficking,]-Establishment of Anti-corruption Courts [with special laws, where the accused bears the burden of proof of his innocence, extra time for investigation]

International Laws that may need ratification or domestication are:-

-The 1st Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which allows individuals to submit complaints to the UN Human Rights Committee.-The Optional Protocol to the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which allows individuals or groups of individuals to submit complaints to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.-The Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which allows victims to submit a communication to the Committee against Torture if the State accused of having committed a violation has accepted the jurisdiction of the Committee [article 22].

43 http//lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Se

42

-The Optional Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights which will allow individuals and NGOs to access to the Court, indirectly through the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights or directly, if and only if, the State which violates human rights accepted such remedy by making a declaration [article 34.6 ].-The Optional Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women the only international convention with particular focus on peculiar situations of Africa.-The 2nd Optional Protocol to International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights for the abolition of Death Penalty

NACSAP should have worked more closely with the LSRP, CAG-Open Budget System, PATS and LGRP. Private sector and civil society could also have proposed some changes to the NACSAP reform programme that may have increased its relevance and enhanced ownership for the strategy.

Reduction of Corruption in Land Administration and other areas of corruption:-

NACSAP’s impact would have been felt if it were more sector specific. Development partners could have also contributed to addressing corruption in the Land, Mining, Natural Resources, and Customs because they have good experience in such sectors. Besides, international organizations such as the Extractive Industry Transparency International (EITI) may have been helpful. For example, a US based organization opposed a land deal because of its potential for high population displacement.

Reduction of corruption in the public service delivery:-

Reduction of corruption in public service delivery could potentially contribute positively by reducing the cost of doing business, hence increasing competitiveness of Tanzanian products in local and international markets. The BEST programme has been working to reduce excessive red tape through seemingly minor improvements such as reducing long queues in government institutions (e.g. the Revenue Authority, Tax, and Vehicle licensing office); in an effort to reduce opportunities for petty corruption. During peak hours, there should be more windows open to serve clients. Other strategies could include reduce the number of forms to be filled, and minimizing bureaucratic procedures.

Compliance of State Institutions with Public Procurement Act

There is a need to amend the Public Procurement Act, in order to have good compliance by State institutions. The amendment should include an “anti-bribery” pact where sizable bonds can be

43

posted and forfeited for non-compliance. Also the institutions which do not follow the act can be charged and prosecuted.

44

Capacity strengthening

It was important to improve professionalism, ensure independence [including concerned institutions], improve technical skills and strengthen capacity in important key activities such as accounting, law, auditing, investigative journalism, prosecution, and recovery of stolen assets. Democracy is very important for fighting corruption. but it is not enough. GoT needs to see improved professional skills and political and managerial effort to control corruption. Privatization without adequate legal and administrative support may in fact lead to increased corruption incidences, as economic liberalization cannot be achieved in the absence of legal controls.

Sequencing of anti-corruption activities and focus on development

It is very important to have proper timings and sequencing of corruption strategies and related developments with regard to priorities, initial actions and consistency of approach to promote and sustain reforms. While developing an anti-corruption agenda, the objective of development should not be missed. The involvement of the civil society and private sector is critical.

International efforts

Cross border corruption shows that it is important to attack corruption at the international level. The sustainability of such efforts should depend on support and coordination of domestic anti-corruption policies and international anticorruption movements.

45

LIMITATIONS OF THE NACSAP II EVALUATION

1. Inadequate time for follow up with key informants and clarification of key findings: sufficient time for follow-up consultation upon sharing preliminary findings did not allow the consultant team adequate opportunity to follow up with key stakeholders such as PPRA and others on the actual level and status of national budget support, TROIKER and other related projects.

2. Debriefing workshop - a planned workshop following the draft report as indicated in the Evaluation TOR was waived due to the time limitations. This workshop would have provided the consultants with adequate opportunity to engage with stakeholders on the findings and to validate them and clarify any outstanding issues and concerns. The rich debate that was expected to ensue from the workshop would have also helped to enrich the report and clarify the provisional and draft report findings, however the omission of this workshop posed a limitation to the consultants in terms of ensuring accuracy of interpretation and potential ownership and utility of the report.. To mitigate the potential negative impacts of reduced levels of consultation however the consultants held a debriefing meeting with members of NSC including GGCU, PCCB, the NACSAP Unit staff and UNDP following sharing of the preliminary findings report and prior to preparation of the draft report. These meetings proved invaluable for identifying key weaknesses and strengths of the provisional report findings which helped to inform the ensuing draft and final report content, format and presentation.

3. Emphasis on process rather than outcome data and information- due to the lack of a results framework showing clear baseline, target, benchmark, figures in the NACSAP documents, it was not possible for the evaluation consultants to accurately assess and report on the real far and wide reaching effects (impacts) of the NACSAP Phase II programme in Tanzania. The report was largely process based with little understanding about its real effects on the wider population in Tanzania. This situation needs to be addressed seriously in future by ensuring a results based approach with a clear results matrix, and logic model with clear, measureable objectives, indicators and targets and specified timeframes with responsibilities for achievement of programme goals with specific stakeholder groups.

46

4.

5 RECOMMENDATIONS

Way Forward- a New Programme

1. Based on the successes of the NACSAP II in achieving up to at least 50% of its objectives yet with less than half of the funds available, limited human resources and the continuing challenges in service delivery, the evaluation team recommends that a new, fiver-year initiative should be developed urgently as a follow-up to the recently concluded NACSAP II. The new programme to be implemented for a minimum of five years could adopt a new name or carry forward as NACSAP Phase III. This decision on the name change should be made in consultation with the wider group of stakeholders including those identified in the enhanced NACSAP II, and others proposed by stakeholders such as the extractive industry EITI and the Construction Industry in order to promote ownership and addresses the needs of all stakeholders allowing for their free and active engagement. This time, the focus of the new programme should be on:

a. Increasing transparency, in an effort to address the perceptions by stakeholders of the NACSAP I and II operating business as usual. To win the war on corruption the new pro-gramme needs to work to correct its image as one that is there for the wrong incentives: (i.e. to benefit from training and meetings and committees and sitting allowances) or one that is just another ‘business as usual venture’. Rather the new programme needs to com-mit to doing business unusual to create even less comfort zones for corrupt practice to en-dure in Tanzania. For the future programme to succeed there must be a deliberate, fo-cused and determined effort to step out of the comfort zone by increasing transparency in all sectors.

b. Best practice44 indicates that it’s important to address both the supply and demand sides of petty and grand corruption. For example, introducing heavy fines for public officials who demand bribes (bribe makers) and members of the public who offer (briber givers) would act as a credible deterrent of this behavior.

c. Best practice also suggests45 that a greater role should be provided to the Ethics Secretar-iat in public education and on increasing awareness for public officials about proper ethi-cal behavior.

44 Anti-Corruption Theory its application in Singapore and Best Practice for Connecticut (Bruce Rittgers 2004)45 Anti-Corruption Theory its application in Singapore and Best Practice for Connecticut (Bruce Rittgers 2004

47

d. Opaque information systems are the breeding systems of corruption and must be avoided at all costs by the new GoT programme. For that to happen it should focus less on training provision and more on strategy. For example, the new programme should ask: ‘what are the 3-5 sectors where spending mostly happens? Is it Agriculture, health, education, construction (road, or other infrastructure), mining, judiciary, police, etc?’. Who should be responsible to ensure transparency in these sectors?. What types of information do we need them to provide? How regularly and through which mediums?

e. Once the strategic partners are identified and consulted, a revised strategy, a programme document and operational manual should be developed as a first output. The results of the 2009 anti-corruption survey and other more recent studies by NGOs should form the basis for the new programme’s focus and engagement with citizens. These documents should contain a strategy for strengthening institutions that are primarily weak instigators in corruption, rather than trying to solve the corruption problem at the grass-roots level because it will not have adequate capacity through its staff and funds to do so. This responsibility should be left to the target partner and other watchdog institutions, such as the Ethics Secretariat, PCCB itself, DPP and MDAs and LGAs to carry out.

f. Despite that the DG-PCCB has done a commendable job in chairing the NACSAP II NSC, the evaluation team recommends that going forward; best practice in the case of Singapore cited above, indicates that a powerful anti corruption agency is normally resisted due to elite opposition, civic concerns about the erosion of liberties, or a combination of both. Therefore the consultant team suggests that the NSC should be managed at the top by a Board made up of high ranking officials from the stakeholder group. This will help to ensure that the burden of responsibility, commitment to results and resource allocation for the new programme is shared equally across. It will also help to promote transparency, accountability, iterative learning and information sharing and promote wider ownership and increased potential for enhanced results and wider participation.

a. Best practice suggests that it’s important that prevention remains at the forefront of any anti-corruption reforms. The long term intervention includes transparency, accountability and informed citizenry. As a complement, deterrence through effective law and its enforcement is equally important to break the cycle.

2. The new programme should work to correct the NACSAP II’s image as one that is there for the wrong incentives: (i.e. to benefit from training and meetings and committees and sitting allowances) or one that is just another ‘business as usual venture’. Rather the new pro-gramme needs to strategize and focus on implementation and on addressing impunity.

48

Transparency and protection of whistle blowers

3. Efforts to minimize face to face contact should be well considered going forward with the new programme. Examples are through creation of web based portals through which mem-bers of the public can report on corruption and also freely share their views with the new programme. There is a need to increase and improve transparency in transactions, and deci-sion making within all MDAs, LGAs, Agencies, Civil Society Organizations, and Private Sector Organizations through updating their laws, acts, rules and regulations. All relevant procurement transaction details including announcements, application procedures, etc should be written in both English and Kiswahili and placed on public notice boards or on bill boards to ensure that the general population has easy access on the detailed information without face to face contact with any officers. Open communication should be encouraged and ICs supported to provide oversight in monitoring transactions at MDA level. NSAs should also introduce ICs that aspire to the same ideals.

4. Access to anti-corruption reporting hotlines (both fixed and mobile lines) needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency in order to resolve the stalemate with Global System for Mobile communication (GSM) providers in Tanzania. Also, anti-corruption complaints and suggestion boxes should be placed away from view by any officers in MDAs and LGAs so that privacy and anonymity is assured for users.

5. In order to improve transparency, there is a need to introduce and act on “Right to Information” so that people may demand information on various issues.

6. There is a need to protect the whistle blowers throughout the country by creating and tabling an independent National Whistle Blowers Act to protect whistle blowers who may come to complain.

7. There is a need, to introduce the client service charter at the LG level in order to promote knowledge of the public about their rights to service delivery. These Charters should be placed clearly up on the wall or at the reception area and in both Kiswahili and English languages for all to see. The new programme should ensure that the Client Service Charters are clearly visible and accessible to the public in either language without any need for face to face contact or enquiry.

8. Increase public awareness efforts on the programme so that people know where to come and report on corruption malpractices.

49

9. Introduce reward and recognition mechanisms to support and encourage Integrity Committee members with their anti-corruption whistle blowing and education efforts. The newly formed BOARD comprising various actors from Governmental and Non-Governmental organizations should include this task as part of the Terms of Reference and be viewed as an oversight body to which the IC members can also report on corruption activities independently.

Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER)

10. A strengthened M&E system is needed that can monitor performance of civil servants, identify functional public financial management systems that are sound or those that have loopholes for corruption, such as with procurement systems: e.g. showing how public funds are lost or recovered and how certain laws either assist or impede anti-corruption efforts. The new programme should introduce an M&E system that helps detect when funds are lost in problematic deals and reports when these funds have been recovered. The Chief PS at State House should be in a position to report confidently as for instance (hypothetical situation: ‘300,000 civil servants are in need of services (type); or ‘Out of the 6 trillion TZ Shillings that has been procured 2 trillion has been lost. So far we have recovered 1.5 trillion through court procedures.) This type of transparency will help to foster reporting on corruption, create increased transparency, confidence and participation by various stakeholders and the public in the new programme. This kind of M&E system is also important for reporting on funds leakages and recoveries.

11. The new programme should ensure to implement the proposed results based M&E framework in an effort to improve service delivery, enhance transparency and introduce a culture of iterative learning through periodic review and reflection. This will involve:

a. Periodic collection of data and information on programme implementation based on measureable baseline data, measureable objectives, indicators, outcomes and targets.

b. Reporting and information dissemination strategies should be created and included as part of the strategy for promoting ownership and mainstreaming within various sectors. M&E activities should involve all stakeholder groups at each stage: as this will also help to enhance their understanding, commitment and knowledge about the intended purpose and results of the programme.

c. Training and capacity building of the new programme staff in M&E and setting up and managing of an M&E system based on the existing framework to be revised as needed. A database of information.

50

d. The PCCB M&E Director and an external training consultant should be engaged in the development and provision of M&E capacity building and training services to the new programme. The database and tools should be designed in parallel with the programme document and be ready for implementation immediately when the new programme starts.

12. Best practice on Performance Monitoring of Anti-Corruption Efforts by Government is evidenced in the Anti-Corruption Strategic Plan for Afghanistan 2011-2013. Beyond the goals and activities provided, this strategic plan includes performance indicators, targets, an implementation matrix linking strategic goals, and activities to expected outcomes and specific timeframes. The new programme could benefit from reference to this document while drafting the new strategy.46

Laws, Acts and Best Practice

13. The new programme should enable the leadership code of ethics act to be updated from the 1995 version, as CSOs donors and others have been pushing on this to make it much more robust

14. People should be educated on the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act where under section 12 to 29, they may take a course of action in both Zanzibar and Tanzania Mainland.

15. There is need to review the media law (Not clear, which law and why so?)and increase efforts to train media on investigative journalism.

16. Since 2004 when the Public Procurement Act became operational, it has been found to have some weaknesses that require amendment to address some operational challenges faced by the Government of Tanzania, PPRA, procuring entities and bidders.47

17. The following are examples of best practice on anti-corruption law implementation around the world. Tanzania may borrow some ideas from these countries in the new programme.

a. Many countries criminalize the publication of news that may “tarnish” the reputation of an accused person, many Asian countries(which country, be specific please) have tried to reform libel law provisions. African countries like Tanzania should also see that “tarnishing of names by media” is punishable by law .

46 Islamic Republic of Afghanistan High Office of Oversight and Anti-corruption (HOO) Strategic Plan 2011-2013, December 27, 2010 (https://www.pksoi.org/document_repository/Lessons/HOO_Anti-Corruption_Strategic_Plan_2011-2013-LMS-732.pdf)47 Report of the PPRA on the Implementation of NACSAP II. (source: PPRA)

51

b. In many Asian countries, International Agreements are used to shape their own anti-corruption legislation to international standards.

c. It is very important that anti-corruption laws match the enforcement capacity of country’s institutions. In many developing countries, law enforcement institutions may lack finance, manpower, skills, other resources and total independence which may compromise the implementation of law. Thus the anticorruption law should be drafted in such a way, that it is easy to understand, easy to apply, demands little judgment in determining its application, and does not give rise to many technical debates which may create room for the accused to “escape”.

d. Corruption cases take a long time to come to light and it is a very complex procedure to investigate. Very often the courts allow only a short time period for further investigation as seen in Italy and protect accused persons. Thus the period of investigation should be long enough to allow adequate time for investigation and prosecution. The law reform should look into this serious problem.

e. Actual proof of corruption is not easy to obtain. The Inter-American Convention against Corruption does not require prosecutors to prove on unaccounted wealth. Instead, the burden of proof falls on the accused, whose lifestyle and wealth is beyond the capacity of known sources, to justify the sources of his income. Countries like India, Malaysia, Pakistan and Nepal have shifted the burden of proof to the accused.

f. As far as anti-money laundering is concerned, countries such as Hong Kong, China and Singapore have special reporting systems that make it obligatory on the financial organization to expose suspicious transactions.

g. Countries like Fiji, have made it obligatory to report any corruption by civil servant and have criminalized failure to report.

h. Most countries punish corruption offenders, but Fiji, South Korea, Malaysia and Pakistan have enacted laws that disqualify any offender from holding any public office.

i. At the early stage of law development, monitoring and evaluation may also identify legal loopholes and gaps which can be addressed during the revision or amendments of such laws.

52

j. Many countries in Asia have introduced legislation on Whistle Blowers Protection and India, Korea and Malaysia ensures confidentiality and anonymity. But South Korea also has panelized disclosure of the informers’ identity48.

48 U4 Anti corruption Good Practices in Singapore.pdf

53

Institutional Mandates and NSC Membership

18. The CAG of the National Audit Office, besides auditing and publishing reports, should be invited to collaborate more closely with watchdog institutions such as the PCCB to spearhead further prosecutions and investigations on corruption in Tanzania. Specifically , the CAG and PCCB should work closely with the Financial Intelligence Unit to trace monies that are suspected to have been obtained through corruption or through dubious means. Extra ministerial Departments known as the Financial Intelligence Unit under the Ministry of Finance established under the Anti- Money Laundering Act should also be strengthened

19. The DPP needs to prosecute successfully and in a timely manner. It needs to recover the proceeds of corruption which has been very difficult to far. To facilitate this, the DPP’s office must have access to the new programme funds and build capacity of its officers.

20. The Ethics Secretariat (ES) should be assisted to increase its manpower and ensure relevant training of its officers in order to be an effective NSC member going forward. Its own mandate should be reviewed and aligned to the needs of the new programme in order to enhance its reach through the existing ES capacity and mandate.

21. The important role of ICs should be expanded to other sectors such as private sector, media and CSOs. They should be empowered through training and facilitation to help them effect their duties properly. They also should be trained in fund raising, report writing and monitoring and evaluation so as to improve their reach and also their reporting skills. Only those officials of highest integrity should be appointed to IC membership, using transparent processes to be developed by the new programme and monitored regularly. Their contributions should also be rewarded through salary increments or additional allowances, professional development and/or other appropriate benefits and awarding mechanisms of government.

22. A new programme needs to work more with CSOs and NGOs to build their capacity and help them become strong partners in combating corruption.

Focus Goals, Objectives and Strategy

23. The current NACSAP II was found to be over-ambitious in its goals and strategy; if the new programme could use existing legislation and implement just half of the NACSAP II goals this would, in the views of many, be a step in the right direction.

54

24. The new programme should focus more on the Police, Judiciary and the Regulatory Framework [BEST Programme]. It should also focus on addressing grand corruption cases with an ‘eye’ on addressing impunity. This includes ensuring adequate resources available to mobilize investigators and witnesses both within Tanzania and outside in order to promote successful investigations, prosecutions and convictions as well as asset recovery. This may require re-strategizing for enhanced implementation by increasing the number of staff in regions who are involved in the programme in order to help follow up grand corruption cases that may take up to 3 years to conclude. Working closer with the DPP, Ethics Secretariat and CAG as well as with NSA watchdog institutions and the media and instituting joint annual monitoring and evaluation and reporting mechanisms will be key. This is an expensive process which requires adequate financial backing from potential additional partners and a joint and expanded NSC managed by a Board.

25. At present the private sector is trade oriented and not productive. There is a parasitic relationship in the economy. A future programme should also focus on production. Thus NACSAP III should be linked with economic development as economic growth may sustain the future programme. This means working more closely with private sector, cognizant of the fact that it’s very wide and may need to be categorized by size and type. It’s also important for a future programme to consider the relationship of private sector members with current organizations with a view to expand the scope of interaction with a variety of private sector outfits rather than only one to minimize the risk of failure.

Funding and Human Resource arrangements

26. Funding arrangements for NACSAP II seem to have been based on somewhat inaccurate assumptions that eventually exposed it to underfunding risks. For example the assumption held by the UNDP –Tanzania staff that the agency was just a small contributor to the NACSAP II funding base was in fact grossly inaccurate based on the evaluation team’s discussion with NACSAP Unit managers and the Chief Accountant in PCCB who was responsible for reporting to UNDP on funding utilization. In fact the UNDP Tanzania was viewed as a significant funder to the programme and the sole funder of the NACSAP Unit Secretariat. Our findings so far indicate that other MDAs including PCCB and others contributed complimentary or in kind contributions such as staff time and fixed assets such as office space for the NACSAP Unit. Therefore when funding was delayed by the UNDP, for various reasons, the continuation of NACSAP II activities was compromised both in terms of quantity and quality. These effects were felt most by goal coordinators who had planned activities outside of Dar es Salaam yet could not achieve them due to the inadequate funding for participant mobilization and staff facilitation through transportation and DSAs.

55

27. Funding to partners of the new programme such as the PPRA that is largely dependent on government and donor financing but faced declining support from both sources rendered it largely unable to fully implement the NACSAP II activities. These include procurement audits, training and procurement investigations and opening up of zonal offices. The same can be said of the Ethics Secretariat that also faced similar funding challenges. In order to address this, adequate budgeting should be ensured coupled with known financial commitments in advance from the Government of Tanzania and developing partners for funding of activities of the new anti-corruption programme.49

28. More efforts should be made to encourage other development partners to contribute funds to a single programme of the Government of Tanzania either indirectly through UNDP’s Programme in Tanzania or directly through the basket fund. The problem with contributing to General Budget Support for this type of programme is that it tends to be used to bridge gaps in funding by Government. Therefore allocation of these funds to the specific corruption reform initiatives is difficult to track as GoT may have other priority concerning during the same period and decide to reallocate these funds. In addition the parallel funding by other DPs of other complementary programmes creates some unhealthy competition for funds and recognition which are counterproductive in the fight against corruption in Tanzania and contrary to the principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness which encourages harmony of reporting formats, joint programming amongst others. Parallel funding to anti-corruption efforts of the GoT poses a potential risk of inefficiency in funds and resource application and wastage through duplication of efforts and resource mismanagement. Therefore the new programme should seek ways to expand membership to other interested development partners including traditional and non-traditional actors who should also agree on how to work together with the GoT through a common cause however avoiding duplication and supporting the government initiative as a first priority through various partners including state and non-state. This is because the anti-corruption strategy for Tanzania is a government owned initiative that is well received by the people of Tanzania and which has potential for positive results given adequate support in terms of financial resources and adequate time.

29. UNDP as the key development partner of the GoT in its national anti-corruption efforts should pursue other potential opportunities with UN organizations through the One UN ‘Delivering as One’ principle. This principle is anchored on promoting more united system that is stronger, more responsive and effective; reconfigured to optimally use its assets and expertise in support of country needs and demands. It is matched by more coherent governance, funding and management arrangements at the centre with consolidation and

49 Report of the PPRA on the Implementation of the NACSAP II (source: PPRA)

56

elimination of duplication and competition being the greatest benefits. For the new anti-corruption programme UNDP Tanzania can pursue opportunities through the Memorandum of Understanding that was signed between the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the UNDP in 2008. This document offers a framework for enhanced cooperation between the two organizations in the provision of technical assistance to Member States in governance, anti-corruption, rule of law and criminal justice reform, to ensure the consistency, coherence and quality of assistance programmes and services. United Nations Organization for Drugs and Crime (UNDOC) is Headquarters in Vienna and has representation in Nairobi, Kenya. Collaboration with UNODC is potentially beneficial to the GoT’s efforts against corruption because of the UN agency’s mission, mandate and goal to assist member states in their fight against illicit drugs, organized crime, corruption and terrorism and through its Corruption and Economic Crimes Branch (CED). A common purpose and shared strategy and approach should be pursued with UNDOC offices in Kenya and UNDP Tanzania in an effort to promote achievement of the new programme’s objectives and goals in preventing and prosecuting corruption cases as well as in asset recovery efforts.

30. The NACSAP Unit operations should be reviewed and reconsidered with the intention of increasing its effectiveness while minimizing its costs. In the view of the consultants, the NACSAP Unit has now matured in terms of training and capacity building delivery. Due to the low numbers of staff in the unit, it cannot realistically be responsible for implementation without adequate support from other colleagues based in the field who can provide follow up services. Therefore the functions and TORs of each member of the NACSAP unit should be reviewed and revised with the goal of including additional advisory services to other MDAs, LGAs and NSAs. Their locations in terms of best fit within the Unit should also be reviewed with the intention of perhaps moving some officers into other relevant institutions for periods of time so as to foster implementation in the wider stakeholder group. In addition, NACSAP Unit staff need to reflect the wider stakeholder group. This includes NSAs who should also appoint officers to work side by side in the Private Public Partnership (PPP) arrangement. This may require modification of the NACSAP Unit with far fewer officers mainly only those involved in administration (finance, M&E and management) based at PCCB HQ while others can be based in the field most of the time revolving around much like the Zonal Officers and in a complimentary way to them.

31. Enhanced and improved record keeping- GoT support to follow up programmes of this kind that are mainstreamed into national budgets is key to ensuring efficiency and effectiveness in service delivery and follow up. Increased transparency in this area is needed with more awareness and information about levels of funding and other support by the GoT will also

57

help its development partners and other interested parties including private sector, media and international partners interested in providing assistance to the government of Tanzania on important national anti-corruption initiatives. Improved record keeping on this important issue of GoT funding is also important for helping to determine the impacts of funds utilization based on various activities on anticipated outcomes and impacts.

Coordination

32. A Board comprising membership representative of both government and non-government actors should be constituted as a higher level body that will provide oversight and advisory services and support to the implementation of new proposed anti-corruption programme over the next five years. The board members should be appointed and selected based on merit and vetted by the Ethics Secretariat in terms of their personal integrity. They should be people of high standing within society with no current or previous record tainted with corruption, in order to have the moral authority to undertake programmatic activities and to achieve the planned goals and outcomes.

33. PCCB as an institution is well equipped both human resource wise, infrastructural and strategically to continue to coordinate the new anti-corruption programme going forward. However an oversight body with a clear TOR should support PCCB in an advisory role

34. Information Communication Technology and media are potential key partner in the fight against Corruption on a national scale in Tanzania. The new national anti-corruption pro-gramme should work to enhance its workings with the media and through use of ICTs to (print, electronic and mobile modes). Representatives from media houses and GSM providers (mobile networks) should ideally be part of the new Board membership in order to ensure that their voices are heard and that they participate fully in promoting the national strategy through their various roles.

Political arrangements

35. Political will and support are key to successful combat of corruption as people in the leadership are in the forefront to ensure that the system works. Permanent Secretaries (PSs) and CEOs must take ownership. So far only about 1/3rd of these officials have taken ownership for the NACSAP II further contributing to its ineffectiveness. Fewer still only about 10% allocate funds to combating corruption in their respective MDAs and LGAs. 2. The GGCU has so far not been effective in promoting discussion on corruption or in coordinating the reform programme. In NACSAP II, one sees a bureaucratic arrangement

58

but no political push on a regular basis. Other than the GGCU, the new programme can be coordinated by the Office of the Controller and Auditor General who can take up this mandate. If the new programme focuses on promoting systems for ensuring compliance the (CAG) would be a key partner as they could also conduct audits which checks about fiduciary responsibility of CAG and systems in place for the new programme. PCCB should continue to conduct investigation and public education, however its mandate could also be expanded to include prosecution of grand corruption cases under the new programme. PCCB and GGCU can champion implementation in government; private sector can champion implementation of the new programme in private sector, while civil society will champion implementation in the grassroots levels.

36. Part of the political will and commitment to the national programme against corruption is the work of the DPP. Currently the rate of prosecutions for corrupt dealings by the DPP is not up to desired levels. A fast tracking system should be introduced for completed cases in order to ensure timely delivery of justice and to reduce potential interference and deference of cases to historical archives. A common saying that should be one of the mottos of the new programme is ‘Justice Delayed is Justice Denied’. Doing business unusual means ensuring timely delivery of justice for the victims of corruption in order to prevent corrupt practices from continuing to destroy the social fabric of the country.

Gender and other vulnerable groups

37. The new programme must not forget the unique contributions and challenges that are currently faced by vulnerable populations including women, people living with disabilities and the very poor and marginalised populations who are often victimized by both grand and petty corrupt practices. A special office or desk should be set up to receive complaints from these groups. Membership to the Board should also be sensitive to the need for equality in gender representation. By doing business unusual, the new programme can as a first step ensure equal representation by men and women on the Board in terms of actual numbers and from state and non-state actors. These people should be carefully selected to ensure that they are outspoken and effective in their mandate on the Board especially due to cultural factors that have traditionally silenced women’s voices, resulting in lower levels of participation by them. Representation by members of the disabled population and by very poor marginalised people on the Board is similarly important.

59

6 ANNEXES

ANNEX 1: REFERENCES 1. NACSAP II Progress Report: January-December, 2010,2. NACSAP II Implementation Reports for 2009, 20103. NACSAP II Implementation Report as per M&E Framework (2008-2011)4. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan for Tanzania – November 19995. The Enhanced National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan [NACSAP II] 2008-2011 –

President’s Office Good Governance Coordinating Unit – May 20086. The Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act, 2007 – The United Republic of Tanzania7. Sheria Ya Gharama Za Chaguzi Namba 6 Ya Mwaka 20108. The Public Leadership Code of Ethics Act No 13 of 1995 – Principal Legislation9. The Basic Rights and Duties of Enforcement Act – Chapter 13 of the laws Principal Legislation

[Revised Edition of 2002]10. The Constitution of The United Republic of Tanzania of 1977 – 199811. Subsidiary Legislation – The Audit Regulations 200912. The Public Audit Act, 200813. The Commission of Human Rights and Good Governance Act, 2001 – Act No 7 of 2001 and

Amendment Act No 16 of 2001 14. National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan II [NACSAP II] Implementation Report 200915. National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan – II [NACSAP II] Implementation Report 201016. Prevention and Combating Corruption Bureau [PCCB] – National Anti-Corruption Strategy and

Action Plan II [NACSAP II] – Monitoring and Evaluation [M&E] Framework Final Report – 25 March 2010

17. Independent Evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan [NACSAP – 2011]18. National Governance and Corruption Survey – Volume 1: Analysis of Main Findings, Conclusions

and Recommendations – November 200919. The NACSAP Monitoring and Evaluation Framework – Draft Final Report - Volume 220. PCCB -NACSAP II Implementation Reports -Physical Performance21. Prevention and Combating of Corruption Survey Volume 4 Enterprise Survey – November 200922. National Governance and Corruption Survey Volume 4 Enterprise Survey – November 200923. The Political Parties Act No 5 of 1992 Incorporating The Amendments made by Act No 7 of 2009. 24. Role of Judicial And Legal Reforms in Business Environment Reform Programmes – A Tanzanian

Case Study by Hagar Russ, Legal Advisor – BEST – Ministry of Planning, Economy and Empowerment.

25. A Handbook on Fighting Corruption February 1999 – Center for Democracy and Governance - USAID

26. International Convention on Civil and Political Rights – Human Rights Committee – Third Periodic Report – Czech Republic

27. PPT Presentation of the NACSAP II M&E Framework by Kulthum Mansoor, Director of Planning, M&E PCCB. 3rd August 2010.

60

28. Report Of The Public Procurement Regulatory Authority On The Implementation Of The National Anti-Corruption Strategy And Action Plan (NACSAP II) (2010/2011)

ANNEX 2. LIST OF EVALUATION PARTICIPANTS

No

Names Institutions Date [time]

National Level (Dar es Salaam)

1 Mr. Tobias Ndaro NACSAP Manager 20-2-2012

1 Mr Emmanuel Mwanga Assistant Coordinator-GGCU 24- 2- 2012

10 (Tulibako, Charles, Steve, Alfeo, Tumi, Sumai Kazi, Nakembetwa Charles, Doreen, Sabina)

NACSAP Goal Coordinators 17-4-2012

1 Joyce Shundi Zonal Coordinator Eastern –PCCB 29-2-2012/1-3-2012

1 Dr Edward Hosea DG - PCCB 25 -2- 2012

1 Mr Hebron Mwakagenda Civil Society. Chairman-Tanzania Anticorruption Network

1-3-12

1 Mr Mathias N. C. Chintunchi Assistant Coordinator - GGCU 19-3-2012

1 Mr Steve Lee Development Partners, Senior Governance Advisor - UNDP

9-5-2012

1 Mr Stephen Mbelle Goal Coordinator - LGA 13-4-2012

1 Ms Doreen Kapwani Media Goal Coordinator 13- 4 2012

1 Mr Francis Kabwe Deputy Registrar of High Court 21-3-2012

61

1 Mr Francis Mwakapalila Assistant Auditor General, National Audit Office, Tanzania

21-3-2012

1 Judge Tandwa / Ibrahim Sapi Mkwawa Jr Registrar of Political Parties/ Assistant Registrar, Office of the Registrar of Political Parties

21-3-2012

1 Group Anti-Corruption Club – Business College Dodoma

30-5-2012

1 Mr. Alex Mfungo Director of Investigation, PCCB 18-4-2012

1 Prof Suleiman Ngware Institute of Development Studies, University of Daressalaam

2-4-2012

1 Mr K Kennedy Acting Assistant Director, LSRP 21-3-2012

1 Mr M. Emmunal Legal Sector Reform Programme 3-4-2012

1 Mr Jeorge Beutoz Bureau Chief of Tameke 3-4-2012 /

3 Donald Mmari/Mr Lukas/Mr Jamal REPOA- Research and poverty Alleviation 4-4-2012

7 Ms Salome Kaganda/team Ethics Secretariat 5-4-2012

1 Judge Amri Manento Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance

5-4-2012

1 Mr John Mireny Media Council of Tanzania 11-4-2012

1 Mr Justin Maganga NACSAP II Coordinator- 12-4-2012

1 Mr Singi R Madata Office of Chief Secretary – Reform Coordination 13-4-2012

62

and Investor’s Complaint Bureau

1 Anselem Daniel Mwampoma Assistant Director, DPP 20-3-2012

2 Mr Singi Madata/ Apolinary Tamayamali Reform Coordinator/Assistant Coordinator 13-4-2012

1 Mr Denis Biseko World Bank 15-5-2012

1 Mr Anders Emanuel Democratic Governance & Human Rights, Embassy of Sweden

16-5-2012

1 Mr John Ulanga Executive Director, The Foundation for Civil Society

23-5-2012

1 Prof Hamisi Dihenga Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education and Vocational Training

20-3-2012

1 Dr. Ramadhani Mlinga PPRA (by email) 3-9-2012

Regional Consultations

1 Mr Sosthenos, W. Kibwango Deputy Regional Bureau Chief, PCCB Dodoma 30-5-2012

1 Mr Faustin Mwakaluga TCCIA Dodoma 30-5-2012

1 John Mayanja Chairman-Business Action Against Corruption / TCCIA Daressalaam

16-7-2012

1 Mr. Robert Kitimbo Managing Director Dodoma Municipal Council 31-5-2012

1 Mr. Lawrence P. Malangwa Chairperson Municipal Council, Dodoma 31-5-2012

1 Nicholas J Buretta Member, Dodoma Municipal Council 31-5-2012

1 Mr Rukondo Mujuberi District Bureau Chief -Bahi 30-5-2012

63

2 Mr Natalis Linuma/Mrs Mary Assumpta Mathew

Secretary /Chairperson- of Integrity Committee – Bahi District, Dodoma

31-5-2012

1 Ms Stella Mpanju Regional Bureau Chief, PCCB Morogoro 1-6-2012

1 Ms Mercy Manyalika Community Education Officer-PCCB Morogoro 1-6-2012

1 Mr Nicolas Ntiyakla Integrity Committee - Morogoro 1-6-2012

1 Ms Agnes Chandoma Integrity Committee - Morogoro 1-6-2012

1 Mr Abdi Dogoti & Group Press Club - Morogoro 1-6-2012

1 Charles _________________ Dean of Students, Jordan University, Morogoro 1-6-2012

10 Kulthum Mansoor, Godfrey J, Tunu Mleli,Alex Mavika, Mr Kazi S, Tulibako Minga, Jonathan S. Makindi M, Juventus Baitu, Thobian Ndaro

PCCB Headquarters, Daressalaam 8-8-2012

1 Mr John Mayanja Chairman – Business Action Against Corruption, TCCIA

16-7-2012

1 Adam Gahhu Tanzania Private Sector Foundation 2-4-2012

1 Mathias Kabunduguru Public Service- Director of Policy Development 19-3-2012

1 Stuart Forster DFID – Senior Govt. Advisor 18-5-2012

79 Total

64

ANNEX 3. INTERVIEW GUIDES

Questions in particular for Government agencies (ie: PCCB, GGCU, DPP, Judiciary, Police, MDAs, LGAs,)

a. Please describe anti-corruption interventions conducted under NACSAP II for pro-moting accountability, transparency, integrity and transparency by your agency? (Probe public expenditure tracking surveys, capacity building, coordination among different agencies, review workshops, anti-corruption curriculum, leaflets produced, newspaper articles etc Number of TV/Radio programs produced as appropriate)

b. What have been the results/impacts of these interventions/challenges? (Probe awareness on corruption, reduced incidence of corruption legislative frameworks and how it impacts the prevention and fight against corruption etc)

c. What in your view has been the most significant change as a result of these interven-tions by (agency name)?

d. What main challenges were experienced during the implementation of NACSAP 1? e. In your view, how effectively has NACSAP II addressed the challenges identified in

NACSAP I?f. Are the design and activities of NACSAP II relevant to the national goals of Tanzania

in governance and the fight against corruption? (Please explain).g. Which agencies/groups do you work with to combat and prevent corruption? h. How well is this relationship working? i. What challenges have you experienced in of working with these agencies/ groups? j. How in your view can these challenges be best addressed in future?k. Is the Ethics Tribunal functional and effective? l. Do you recall how many leaders have appeared before it?m. How much revenue do you estimate to have been lost on corruption since the NAC -

SAP II was implemented? (Probe trends-downwards or upwards)n. What is the level of compliance with assets/liabilities declaration?o. Generally, what challenges do you encounter in the fight against corruption? How

can they be addressed?p. Have you ever witnessed any corrupt practices within your organization?q. How did you or other officials address the corrupt practices?r. What is the level of complaints received from the public? s. How much money is allocated to anti-corruption activities? (probe adequacy of fi-

nancial resources)

65

t. What is the staff capacity? (Probe adequacy of Human Resources)u. What recommendations do you have for the future of this project?v. Any other comments?

66

Checklist for Government Agencies

The above interview guide should be used together with the checklist below:

Checklist for MDAs

Name of MDA_________________________________________________________________________

Date of Observation/Interview______________________________________________________

1. Integrity Committee Exists (tick one)

YES

NO

2. What are the main functions of the Integrity Committee?---------------3. Training provided for Integrity Committee on Ethics and Anti-Corruption

YES

NO

4. Have the IC’s chairperson been trained?

YES

NO

5. Number of IC members trained on Ethics and anti-corruption_____________________________6. How often to the IC hold meetings_______________________________7. Does the IC prepare quarterly reports

YES

NO

8. To whom do you report? Do you see any action taken out of these reports?9. Is there a client service charter for LGS?

67

YES

NO

10. Is there an anti-corruption plan?

YES

NO

Interview Guide for Non State Actors

(i.e.: Faith-based Organisation/Community Based Organizations/Civil Societies/ Business Organisations/Tertiary institutions/political parties)

a. Please describe the focus/main activities of your organization?

b. Are you involved in anti-corruption interventions under NACSAP II? If yes, to what

extent were you involved in the design and implementation of NACSAP II? Probe on

planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation?

c. What have been the main results/impacts of your intervention under NACSAP II?

d. What support have you received under NACSAPII? Has it been relevant? Adequate?

e. Which agencies/groups did work with when implementing interventions under

NACSAP II? How has been the working relationship? What have been the challenges

of working with these groups? How can these challenges be addressed?

f. What should have been done differently for the NACSAP II implementation?

g. What are the main challenges of fighting corruption in Tanzania? Have these chal-

lenges been addressed under NACSAPII? If no, how can they be addressed?

h. What key systems are you aware of for promoting and ensuring transparency , account-

ability and integrity and accountability in government? (probe impacts)

i. What key systems are in place/institutionalised for ensuring transparency , accountability

and integrity and accountability in your organization? (probe impacts)

j. Have you heard about anti-corruption messages in the media?

k. Do you write regular reports? How often?

68

l. To whom are regular reports sent? Who responds, verbal or written?

Tertiary institutions , ask

o about number of active anti-corruption clubs

o about level of awareness on corruption issues.(can they name some)

Media ask :

o If managing editors have been trained on responsible/investigative journalism

o Number of articles published in the media on corruption and the trend

69

Interview Guide for Integrity Committees

a. Location of your IC

b. When was the IC formed?

c. What is the composition of the IC membership? (number/officials/level of seniority)

d. How are the membership criteria selected and decided?

e. What support have you received under the NAPSAC II? (Please describe)

f. How relevant/adequate is the support that you have received so far?

g. What specific type of support do you need still to fully execute your mandate?

h. What anti-corruption activities have you been involved in under the NACSAP II?

i. What have been the results/impacts of these activities?

j. What challenges do you face in implementing anti-corruption activities?

k. How can these challenges be addressed?

70

l. What key systems are in place/institutionalised for ensuring transparency and ac-

countability of the IC’s activities?

m. What recommendations do you have for the future?

71

ANNEX 4: NACSAP II GOAL PROGRESS AND STATUS SUMMARY INSTRUMENTSUMMARY OF PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS ON NACSAP II GOALS AND BENCHMARKS (SOURCE: NACSAP UNIT)

NACSAP II Goals Number of Activities

Activities Fully Achieved

Activities Partially Achieved

Activities Not implemented Not determined

No. Percent No. Percent Number Percent Number Percent

GOAL 1: Combat corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root causes NO INFORMATION

GOAL 2: Strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms in all MDAs 7 3 42.8 3 42.8 0 0.0 1 14.3

GOAL 3: Introduce systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in LGAs 9 2 22.2 3 33.3 0 0.0 4 44.4

GOAL 4: Mainstream &d empower the private sector into anti-corruption NO INFORMATION

GOAL 5: Mainstream and Empower CSOs and other NSAs into the Anti Corruption Process 6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 100.0

GOAL 6: Raise public awareness on corruption 7 5 71.4 0 0.0 2 28.6 0 0.0

GOAL 7: Build synergy between NACSAP and Legislative and Judicial Integrity programs 7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 100.0

GOAL 8: enhance the capacity of PCCB, GGCU and Director Of Public Prosecution to deal with corruption, manage and implement NACSAP

7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 100.0

GOAL 2: Strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms in all MDAs

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for

2008-2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented1. Establish and build capacity of integrity committees

Establish and train 128 MDAs ICs

Establish and train 19 MDAs ICs

Establish and train 12 MDAs ICs

12 training activities for ICs(2009)

10 training activities for ICs(2010)

10 training activities for ICs(2011)

12 training for ICs(2009)

4 training activities for ICs(2010)

3training activities for ICs(2011)

B

The challenge is delays of funds and shortage.

It needs time to invite participants for the training. Sometimes participants don’t show up

2. Develop monitoring and reporting systems for the integrity committees

Quarterly reports from ICs

Developed M& E Questionnaire

Quarterly reports from ICs

Developed M&E Questionnaire

Quarterly reports from ICs

No targets set

GGCU are the ones who collects and compile reports it is challenging to get information on time

3. Educate staff on the public procurement Act and monitor application and compliance

2 trainings 0 training activities for Tender Boards(2009)10 training activities for

0(training activities for Tender Boards 2009)2 training activities for

B

The challenge is delays of funds and shortage.

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for

2008-2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

ImplementedTender Boards (2010)10 training activities for Tender Boards (2011)

Tender Boards (2010)0 training activities for Tender Boards (2010)

4. Conduct Mid-Year and End Year Review Workshops

1 Mid Year Review

2 reviews (2009)2 reviews (2010)2reviews (2011)

0 reviews (2009)1 reviews (2010)0 reviews (2011)

B

The challenge is delays of funds and shortage.

5. Strengthen Client Service Charters at MDAs

All MDAs trained were insisted on developing and publishing Clients Service Charter

All MDAs trained were insisted on developing and publishing Clients Service Charter

All MDAs trained were insisted on developing and publishing Clients Service Charter

Depends on the number of training for ICs (above)

Depends on the number of training for ICs (above)

A

Most MDAs have clients Service Charter

6. Publish and publicize anti- corruption bi-annual reports

Annual report published and publicised

Annual report published and publicised

Annual report published and publicised

1 Annual Report(2009)1 Annual Report (2010)1Annual Report (2011)

1 Annual Report(2009)1 Annual Report (2010)1Annual Report (2011)

A

7. Introduce and All MDAs All MDAs All MDAs Depends on Depends on A

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for

2008-2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implementedencourage the use of whistle-blowing and hotline systems.

trained were encouraged to introduce whistle blowing and hotline systems

trained were encouraged to introduce whistle blowing and hotline systems

trained were encouraged to introduce whistle blowing and hotline systems

the number of training for ICs (above)

the number of training for ICs (above)

Planned Annual Budget (Tsh) 85,451,407

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh)

Annual Variance (+) (-) and comments

GOAL 3: Introduce systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in LGAs

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

1. Introduce Council Integrity Committees (ICs)

132 LGAs were introduced

1 LGA was introduced N/A

133 LGAs to be introduced ICs

133 LGAs were introduced to ICs

A

2. Build capacity of LGA ICs to monitor and report on corruption and promote good local governance

308 ICs members were trained

189 ICs members were trained

To train 532 ICs members

497 ICs members were trained

129 LGAs Directors, and

127 ICs chairpersons were trained

A

3. Develop and produce articles and brochures on ethics at the workplace

No information provided

4. Hold regular integrity monitoring group meetings

39 LGAs held meetings

67 LGAs held meetings

69 LGAs held meetings

133 LGAs to hold meetings

69 LGAs held meetings

B

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented5. Develop public education programmes on corruption, good governance and the rights and responsibilities of citizens in local communities

No information provided

6. Build capacity of Council Tender Boards on procurement system and procedures

24 CTB members were trained

431 CTB members were planned to be trained

24 CTB members were trained

B

7. Introduce and encourage the use of whistle blowing and the hotline system

No information provided

8. Introduce client service charters in all LGAs

60 LGAs has CSC

67 LGAs has CSC

75 LGAs has CSC

133 LGAs to have CSC

75 LGAs has CSC

B

9. Build capacity of community- based organizations, service delivered and outlets for combating corruption

No information provided

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

ImplementedPlanned Annual Budget (Tsh)

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh)

Annual variance (+) or (-) and comments

GOAL 3: Introduce systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in LGAs

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

1. Introduce Council Integrity Committees (ICs)

132 LGAs were introduced

1 LGA was introduced N/A

133 LGAs to be introduced ICs

133 LGAs were introduced to ICs

A

2. Build capacity of LGA ICs to monitor and report on corruption and promote good local governance

308 ICs members were trained

189 ICs members were trained

To train 532 ICs members

497 ICs members were trained

129 LGAs Directors, and

127 ICs chairpersons were trained

A

3. Develop and produce articles and brochures on ethics at the workplace

3 LGAs developed, produced articles& brochures

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

4. Hold regular integrity monitoring group meetings

39 LGAs held meetings

67 LGAs held meetings

69 LGAs held meetings

133 LGAs to hold meetings

69 LGAs held meetings

B

5. Develop public education programmes on corruption, good governance and the rights and responsibilities of citizens in local communities

36 out of 133 LGAs

has developed

public education program

24 out of 133LGAs has developed

public education program

95 out of 133LGAs

developed education program

A total of 95 LGAs did

develop public education

133 LGAs to develop public

education program

6. Build capacity of Council Tender Boards on procurement system and procedures

24 CTB members were trained

431 CTB members were planned to be trained

24 CTB members were trained

B

7. Introduce and encourage the use of whistle blowing and the hotline system

130LGAs has suggestion boxes

132 LGAs has suggestion boxes

133 LGAs were planned to have suggestion boxes

132 LGAs has suggestion boxes

8. Introduce client service charters in all LGAs

60 LGAs has CSC

67 LGAs has CSC

75 LGAs has CSC

133 LGAs to have CSC

75 LGAs has CSC

B

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011 Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially AchievedC= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented9. Build capacity of community- based organizations, service delivered and outlets for combating corruption

33 CBOs its member were trained

25 CBOs its member were trained

36 CBOs its member were trained

90 CBOs its members to be trained

94 CBOs members were trained

Planned Annual Budget (Tsh)

229,045,890/= 17,875,000/=

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh) 84,205,363 63,596,375 182,041,372 57,663,330

Annual variance (+) or (-) and comments

GOAL 4: Mainstream and empower the Private Sector into Anticorruption

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

Identify potential business and corporate associations and build their capacity for anti corruption initiatives

470 identified 340 identified 220 identified 71 46

Convene a national forum for business sector to identify interests and goal setting for anti corruption.

Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done

Build capacity of private sector for corporate governance to complete ongoing reform progresses

Training a total of 470 members from business and private sector associations

Training of 340 members from business sector and private sector associations

Training of 220 members from business and private sector associations

A total of 71 activities were planned

A total of 46 activities were implemented

More associations were reached on capacity building make sure that they disseminate the message of anti corruption to more citizens

Need more resource both human and material to cover a wide range private sector activities

800,000,000/=

Promote corporate social responsibility both local and central levels

Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done

Introduce an integrity pact and get business and corporate entities to sign to commit to transparency and accountability in financial transactions

Not completed Not completed Not completed Not completed Not completed Not completed

Institute and sponsor annual forum on anti corruption for private sector

Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

Create public private partnerships and dialogue to include central government and LGAs to fight corruption and monitor results

BAAC Created and enhanced , conducted a research on PPP to enhance partnership

Establish an annual Award to honor business and corporate entities for upholding integrity and good corporate governance

Not done Not done Not done Not done Not done

GOAL 5: Mainstream and Empower CSOs and other NSAs into the Anti Corruption Process

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially Achieved

C= Not implemented

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

Stimulate formation of the 'Civil Society Anti Corruption Coalition' and institutionalise regular interface with state anticorruption

agencies

None1 first meeting on establishment of TACN

1, TACN established and registered

2 trainings 4 trainings 4 trainings none

Build capacity for advocacy of identified non-state integrity organizations

1, political parties

1 training, CSOs.

2, trainings, CSOs none 4 trainings 4 trainings

none

Support political parties to develop internal anticorruption mechanisms

none1 training political parties

2, trainings, women political parties

none 4 trainings 3 trainings

delays of funds

Encourage and support faith based organizations in anticorruption advocacy

none 1 training, FBOs none 1 training,

FBO 4 trainings 2 trainingsdelays of funds

Include secondary schools and tertiary institutions in anticorruption processes

none1 training, tertiary institution

1 training, tertiary institutions

2 trainings, tertiary institutions

4 trainings 4 trainingsnone

Build capacity of the media for investigative and responsible journalism and

This activity has been shifted to

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully AchievedB=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory

Notes: Challenges,

Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

improved reporting on corruption media

Planned Annual Budget (TZ Sh)

GOAL 6: Raise public awareness on corruption

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

1. Develop an effective and sustained public communication strategy for anticorruption to include the extensive use of the media.

Not implemented

Not implemented

4 nil C

A communication strategy was not established due to

2. Introduce anti corruption public education activities in local communities (LGAs) through the District Bureau Chiefs of PCCB

Not implemented

a number of newsletter,

leaflets, articles,

calendars, other materials

were printed and distibuted.

Not implemented

Radio and TV programmes on

corruption education

were recorded and aired out

eg Rushwa Adui wa Haki, Ijue

8

UNLIMITED

Nil

DISBURSEMENT done and over 50% of citizens

reached.

C

Most of what was going to be thought and done was supervised and conducted by the desk of community education officers in all districts

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

TAKUKURU, songs by King Ki

ki and wazee sugu, TM

music, Mrisho Mpoto were

composed and aired out.

Stand bannersand

caps carrying corruption

messges were printe and distributed

supervised by the DBCs of PCCB

3. Introduce anti corruption curriculum as part of a National Civic Education Program

Not implemented

A memorandum

of understanding was signed by the minister of

1 1 A

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

education and the DG of PCCB.

4. Develop high public profile on NACSAP and other anti corruption initiatives and successes such as launching national reports

A NACSAP II annual report for 2009 book

carrying all stakeholders

reports, challenges and way forward

was published and distributed

A NACSAP II annual report for 2010 book

carrying all stakeholders

reports, challenges and way forward

was published and distributed

2 2 A

5. Strengthen public education and citizens empowerment

Training the journalists, editors and

media owners on corruption

Act so that they carry the message

publicly to the

Training the journalists, editors and

media owners on corruption

Act so that they carry the message

publicly to the

8 8 A

There is still a problem with our Act and the media

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

citizens citizens

6. Establish a National Anti corruption Forum for annual stakeholder review of NACSAP

Successfully accomplished

Successfully accomplished

2 2 A

A one day conference is not enough we need at least two to three days discussions

7. Create a forum for leaders of the core reform processes LSRP, PFMRP and PRSP) to interface regularly on anti corruption

planned together with

the annual forum and done along

with the quarterly steering

committee

planned together with

the annual forum and done along

with the quarterly steering

committee

8 8 A

These sections are done quarterly and are fruitful since we update each other on the ongoing activities and implementations by each stakeholder on their targeted implementation of the fight

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

against corruption.

Planned Annual Budget (Tsh)

$ 112,600

TSH 152,010,00

0

$ 120,000

TSH 162,000,000

$60,000

TSH 81,000,000

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh)

TSH 70,250,000

TSH 49,817,815

TSH 74,146,050 TSH 50,009,250

Annual variance (+) or (-) and comments

OUTPUT

a big change has been seen

in reporting corruption

cases by the media outlets,

they do

OUTPUT

in realizing that different

people learn in different ways, an additional concretization was necessary

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

investigation, consult all

parties, involve PCCB in

verifications and produce

stories that are accurate and precise to the general public.

NACFs have brought

stakeholders together and to how other

parties conduct

themselves in the fight against

corruption.

through songs, poems and plays (acts) here other

citizens came to learn of corruption

through these means/

programmes.

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-

2011Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not

Brief explanatory Notes: Challenges, Variance, Etc

2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total Implemented

The general public are now concertized on

their role in the fight, where to

report and how to report on complains on corruption

issues.

GOAL 7: Build synergy between NACSAP and Legislative and Judicial Integrity programs

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

1. Mechanisms introduced for regular interface of APNAC with Primary constituencies, locally and internationally

Several Anti-Corruption laws were enacted and complying with UNCAC

Introduction of Election Expenses Act,2010

No information on targets

Emphasis should be on constituencies

2. APNAC supported technically and materially to build capacity for anti-corruption

144 APNAC Members trained and provided with Legislations and other documents

37 APNAC Members were trained

No information on targets

APNAC to actively work with NACSAP unit to create awareness to their constituency voters

3. Parliamentary Committees supported technically and materially to perform their role in anti- corruption

200 Members of Parliaments were trained

21 Members of Justice and Constitution Affairs were trained on issues of corruption and

No information on targets

MPs to actively work with NACSAP unit to create awareness to their constituency voters

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

ImplementedPCCA,2007

4. NACSAP linked to LSRP through ATIP to enhance integrity in the Judiciary

11 Judges from high court trained

14 Judicial service commission officials

85 High court official from Commercial division trained

70 Registrars from high court and Magistrates from regions trained

No information on targets

Improving Judiciary Infrastructures and Human Resources

5. NACSAP liaise with the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority on application of PPA

PCCB and PPRA has signed an MoU to work together

41 Tender Board members were trained on corruption and Ethics infrastructure and PPA,2004

No information on targets

PCCB continue to work with PPRA

6. NACSAP liaise with the TAMISEMI (PMO-RALG) and National Audit Office

CAG office and TAMISEMI continue to report corruption practices to PCCB

CAG office and TAMISEMI continue to report corruption practices to PCCB

CAG office and TAMISEMI continue to report corruption practices to PCCB

CAG office and TAMISEMI continue to report corruption practices to PCCB

No information on targets

NAO and PCCB has a good working relationCAG forward reports with corruption elements to PCCB

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented25 NAO official trained

7. Half-yearly forum instituted for integrity program leaders to share information and ideas on improving the general anticorruption agenda

No information on targets

This is among the set backs, NACASP III Should insist on this because stakeholders need feedback

Planned Annual Budget (Tsh)

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh)

Annual variance (+) or (-) and comments

GOAL 8: enhance the capacity of PCCB, GGCU and Director Of Public Prosecution to deal with corruption, manage and implement NACSAP

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

C= Not implemented

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

1. Build organization capacity of PCCB, GGCU and DPP

PCCA No. 11,2007 enacted and used

24 RBCs and 113 DBCs from PCCB were trained

DPP and GGCU unit trained DPP and GGCU unit trained

No information on targets

There is still a need to continue building capacity of PCCB,GGCU and DPP

2. Improve logistics support for PCCB, GGCU and DPP

No information on targets

PCCB, DPP and GGCU need more capacity in terms of Human Resource and other resources

3. Improve human capacity PCCB, GGCU and DPP

Increased number of PCCB’s staff to 1700 PCCB offices went up to all the districts

Data on allegation reported, cases investigated and prosecution are available

Data on allegation reported, cases investigated and prosecution are available

Data on allegation reported cases investigated and prosecution are available

No information on targets

Increase of cases in the court of law.

PCCB, DPP and GGCU need more capacity in terms of Human Resource and other resources

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented

4. Establish systems for data collection, analysis and reporting

System for data collection

analysis and reporting established

System for data collection

analysis and reporting established

System for data collection

analysis and reporting established

System for data collection

analysis and reporting established

No information on targets

Data on corruption are readily available and updated

5. Undertake periodic National Diagnostic Studies of Governance and corruption

Governance survey was conducted, report available and distributed to the public and via PCCB’s website

Governance survey was conducted, report available and distributed to the public and via PCCB’s website

Governance survey was conducted, report available and distributed to the public and via PCCB’s website

Governance survey was conducted, report available and distributed to the public and via PCCB’s website

No information on targets

MDAs who were reported as most corrupt started to be given more attention in terms of training, investigations and more research

6. Corruption on natural resource exploitation monitored by PCCB

PCCB continue to investigate and prosecute cases concerning natural resources.

PCCB continue to investigate and prosecute cases concerning natural resources.

PCCB and Ministry of Natural Resources work together

PCCB and Ministry of Natural Resources work together

No information on targets

Planned Activities as per NACSAP II Document

Actual activities implemented(Type/Number)

Sum total of planned against implemented activities for 2008-2011

Type/Number)

Achievement of Targets

A = Fully Achieved

B=Partially Achieved

Brief explanatory Notes:

Challenges, Variance, Etc2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Planned Total

Implemented7. Effective monitoring and evaluation of NACSAP

NACSAP M&E mechanism has been developed and used

NACSAP M&E mechanism has been developed and used

NACSAP M&E mechanism has been developed and used

No information on targets

Capacity Building to NACSAP team and Stakeholders on issues of M&E needed

Planned Annual Budget (Tsh)

Actual Annual Budget (Tsh)

Annual variance (+) or (-) and comments

ANNEX 5: UN GOVERNANCE ACTION PLAN (GAP)

GAP Total Budget - US$ 69,128,000

The main objective of the UNDP governance action plan is to strengthen the capacity of the Government of Tanzania to improve good governance through building capacity of:

Relevant ministries, departments and agencies to advance key national strategies for good governance

Government of Tanzania to lead more effective aid management and aid coordination Select ministries, departments, agencies, local government authorities to have increased

capacity for planning, budgeting, monitoring and reporting Government of Tanzania to advance fulfillment of its international treaty obligations Government of Tanzania's justice system to better protect the rights of women and

children in contact/conflict with the law and is better able to respond to their needs Select communities to participate in democratic and peaceful discourse Key institutions to effectively implement their election and political functions

B: National Development Goals-Mkukuta

National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty:

Ensuring systems and structures of governance uphold the rule of law and are democratic, effective, accountable, predictable, transparent, inclusive and corruption-free at all levels

 Improving public service delivery to all, especially to the poor and vulnerable

 Promoting and protecting human rights for all, particularly for poor women, children, men and the vulnerable Ensuring national and personal security and safety of properties

C: Zanzibar Poverty Reduction Plan –Mkuza 2010-2015

Promote sports, culture and preserve historical and cultural heritage Ensure greater citizens participation in democratic governance Strengthen the rule of law, respect for human rights and access to justice

Improve democratic institutions and national unity

ANNEX 6: TOR FOR THE NACSAP II EVALUATION

Independent Evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (2006-2011), Tanzania

Closing Date: Thursday, 29 September 2011 (closed)

United Nations Development Programme Plot 134-140, Kings Way/Mafinga Street (off Kinondoni Road) Dar-es-Salaam Tel: (255-22) 266 80000/ 219 9200 Fax: (255-22) 266 8749

Background

The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania launched the Second Phase of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan (NACSAP II) on December 10, 2006. One of the key objectives of NACSAP II, implemented between 2007 and 2011, was to complement and integrate anti-corruption measures into the core public sector reforms including: Public Sector Reform Programme (PSRP), Legal Sector Reform Programme (LSRP), Local Government Reform Programme (LGRP), Public Financial Management Reform Programme (PFMRP) in strengthening and instituting good governance, transparency, accountability, integrity, efficiency and improved public service delivery.

NACSAP II also aimed to encourage strategic partnership between the anti-corruption bodies of the Government, the private sector, civil society, media and Development Partners (DP) in combating corruption and enhancing good governance in Tanzania. The key executors of NACSAP II are the Preventing and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB), the Good Governance Coordination Unit (GGCU) at State House.

The strategic goals and designated foundational activities of NACSAP II are:

Goal 1:

Combat corruption in a more scientific way and by addressing its root causes:

Through more use of updated data collected through periodic surveys, audits and research which inform the implementation of NACSAP II.

Goal 2: Strengthen anticorruption mechanisms in all the MDAs:

Through the establishment and built capacity of 'Integrity Committees' in all government institutions, strengthening the Client Service Charter in the public service and introduction of whistle-blowing and hotline systems.

Goal 3: Introduce systems of integrity, accountability and transparency in Local Government Administration (LGAs):

Introduction of Council Integrity Committees, public education programs on corruption, good governance and the rights and responsibilities of citizens in local communities, capacity built for Council Tender Boards on procurement system and procedures, and the introduction of Clients Service Charters in all LGAs whistle blowing and hotline system.

Goal 4:Mainstream and empower the Private Sector into anticorruption:

Identify potential Business, Corporate and Professional associations, including those of the media, and build their capacity for anticorruption initiatives, Convene a national forum for the Business Sector to identify interests and goal-setting for anticorruption and promotion of corporate social responsibility at both local and central levels.

Goal 5: Mainstream and empower CSO and other non-state actors to engage in anticorruption processes:

Stimulate the formation of a 'Civil Society Anticorruption Coalition' and institutionalize regular interface with state anticorruption agencies, including support to Political Parties on internal anticorruption mechanisms, and encouraging faith-based organizations in anticorruption advocacy.

Goal 6: Raise public awareness of anticorruption:

Develop an effective and sustained public information, education and communication (IEC) strategy for anticorruption, to include the extensive use of the Media, develop a high public profile for NACSAP and other anticorruption initiatives and successes, strengthen public education and citizens' empowerment and encourage/incentivize the public to act as Whistleblowers.

Goal 7: Build synergy between NACSAP and Legislative and Judicial integrity programs: Mechanisms introduced for regular interface of APNAC with its primary constituencies, locally and internationally, APNAC supported technically and materially to build capacity for anticorruption, and Relevant Parliamentary Committees supported technically and materially to perform their oversight roles.

Synergies built with public reform programs.

Goal 8:Enhance the capacity of PCCB, GGCU and Director of Public Prosecution to deal with corruption, and to manage and implement NACSAP:

Build organizational capacity of PCCB, GGCU and DPP, for management, monitoring and evaluation of NACSAP II.

Management and Coordination of NACSAP II

As a measure to ensure inclusiveness, popular and local ownership as well as effective implementation, a broad-based National Steering Committee was established to provide overall policy and strategic guidance to the implementation of NACSAP II. The NSC is co-chaired by the Director General of PCCB and the Coordinator of GGCU. Membership of the NGC consists of almost all the integrity agencies of the government, private sector representative, Civil Society, Media, and development partners, a full list is available as Annex 1. A dedicated NACSAP II implementation unit was set up in PCCB to coordinate and manage the implementation of the NACSAP on a day to day basis and liaise with all implementing partners and the PCCB District Bureau Chiefs who are directly responsible for NACSAP implementation in Local Government Authorities.

A National Anti-Corruption Forum

As part of the implementation modalities and particularly as a means for an open dialogue on anti-corruption and the national approaches to addressing the scourge. A NACF was held on an ad hoc basis and provided a platform for dialogue on matters of corruption and public conduct. Four meetings were held where key stakeholders including state integrity and oversight institutions, local government authorities, civil society, the private sector, and development partners discussed progress on the fight against corruption.

Key Implementation Achievements:

The provision of a Steering Committee for coordination of national stakeholders in the fight against corruption.

The promotion of anti-corruption in schools through AC Clubs. The setting up of integrity committees in all local government authorities. Contribution to the formulation and inclusive validation of a new Election Expenses Act. The development of a comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation framework for

NACSAP II. Building awareness on the negative effects of corruption Justification for the evaluation: Corruption, both petty and grand, constitutes a serious problem in Tanzania, as in other

countries in the region. The commitment to fight corruption was stated publicly by the Government of on a number of high profile occasions, including most recently in the President's inaugural address to the National Assembly, November 2010.

As well, in the fight against corruption Tanzania has ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) and established the PCCB.

The NACSAP II was designed to support and coordinate efforts across government and across society in developing the necessary capacities to fight corruption. The NACSAP II takes the Tanzania Poverty Reduction Strategies (MKUKUTA I and MKUKUTA II) as its starting point.

In the later part of the implementation period of NACSAP II it was necessary to establish a comprehensive NACSAP II Monitoring and Evaluation framework. The M&E framework and results are intended to provide accurate and reliable information on the status of corruption – including relevant proxy indicators – as well as on anti-corruption efforts. The data and reports from this M&E facility will be an important tool in the evaluation of the effectiveness of national prevention initiatives within the NACSAP framework.

NACSAP II comes to an end in December 2011 after four full years of implementation. The government of Tanzania and its stakeholders are keen to maintain a national approach toward curbing corruption. However before a new national approach can be determined it is essential to assess the progress made towards the realization of the NACSAP II goals. A comprehensive and independent evaluation will provide an objective analysis of lessons learnt and recommendation from the implementation of NACSAP II. The NACSAP II Steering Committee agreed on an evaluation to take place before December 2011 so as to allow for timely planning for the approach to succeed NACSAP II.

Objectives of the evaluation:

The main objective of the assignment is to evaluate the NACSAP II approach, achievements, challenges and shortfalls giving clear guidance and recommendations for continued national approaches for prevention and combating corruption. The aim of the evaluation is to provide a qualitative, informative and summative assessment of the strategy and plan in order to inform stakeholders on the design, organization, management, implementation, relationships, and progress towards achievement of the stated objectives. The evaluation will also be used to document lessons learnt so far and to make recommendations that would guide any successor to NACSAP II.

Scope of the evaluation:

An in depth review of implementation of various components and outputs outlined in the NACSAP II with a view to identifying the level of achievement as well as an analysis of factors in case the set benchmarks were not met.

An in depth review of overall progress towards the goals and benchmarks. Assess the quality of partnership, national capacity and ownership and sustainability vis a

vis the strategy and action plan; Assess the adequacy of resources made available to NACSAP implementation.

Extract the lessons learned and best practices that can be considered in the planning and design of the future NACSAP.

The consultant (s) will conduct the evaluation nation wide and should pay particular attention to the following criteria:

Relevance:

Evaluate the logics and unity of the process in planning and designing the activities to develop the capacity of government and others to fight corruption and provide subsequent capacity building programs to anti-corruption awareness and efforts. The extent to which the design and implementation of activities was able to respond to and address:

The gaps identified in the evaluation of NACSAP I 2000-2004; Recommendations emerging from various corruption surveys and reports; The needs of the various stakeholders in addressing corruption at various levels; Relevance to National goals in governance and the fight against corruption, Acceptability and feasibility of activities for stakeholders for each component.

Effectiveness:

The extent to which activities yielded expected outputs at component level and contributed to realization of the strategic thrust of NACSAP II namely:

7 Concerted Government, civil society, private sector, development partner approach8 Continual strengthening of the laws that relate to corruption and public accountability9 Increase public awareness of anticorruption10 Enforcement of anticorruption laws including prosecutions, punishments and the recovery

of assets acquired through corrupt practices11 Improve and strengthen public service delivery12 Strengthen oversight and watchdog institutions13 Foster transparency, integrity and accountability in the conduct of public affairs14 Widen the scope of public awareness and prevention by empowering non-state actors –

private sector, NGOs, civil society organizations and the Media – both legally and operationally -- to participate effectively in the fight against corruption.

Efficiency:

The evaluation shall further examine to what extent the NACSAP resources were utilized economically, including but not limited to:

The efficacy of the planned activities within the time frame and budget for project implementation;

To what extent resources were used appropriately to produce the intended outputs; The extent to which project funds, expertise and time were used judiciously to achieve

desired project results.

Impact:

The evaluation should seek to approximate or estimate the project's contribution to the fight against corruption and particularly and prevention and combating graft and assess the realization of the expected benefits of NACSAP II as follows:

Corruption at the ministries, departments and agencies of Government will be monitored and reported for appropriate actions to be taken.

Corruption within Local Government Authorities will be monitored and reported for appropriate actions to be taken.

With the establishment of Integrity Committees in a number of institutions including; MDAs, LGAs, Secondary Schools and tertiary institutions, and the engagement of civil society, the media and the private sector, Public Awareness will be greatly enhanced which will strengthen demand for domestic accountability.

The strengthening of the key anticorruption agencies including the PCCB and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution will enhance the capacity to investigate and prosecute petty or grand corruption cases.

The integration of NACSAP II with the other core reform processes will not only broaden the scope of coverage, but also widen and deepen the war against corruption.

Reduction of corruption, particularly in land administration and the areas that are rich for revenue collection namely, natural resources, tax collection and customs will enhance domestic resource mobilization for national development and reduce donor dependency.

Reduction of corruption in public service delivery will enhance efficiency and public trust in the government and civil servants.

The compliance by state institutions with the Public Procurement Act 21, 2004 will minimize if not eliminate corruption in public procurement and save funds for development.

Duties and Responsibilities

Evaluation Process and methodology -

The evaluation process is expected to contain three phases:

1. inception, 2. data collection; 3. analysis and reporting.

Inception Phase

In the first two weeks of the assignment the evaluation team will review existing documentation, meet with the evaluation commissioner and an inception report which includes a detailed evaluation work plan. The report is expected to outline the approach which the evaluators will engage to ensure wide stakeholder participation in the evaluation process. The report will specify the approach to nationwide consultations and show samples of evaluation tools in the exercise. A presentation and discussion will be held with the NACSAP Steering Committee to validate the inception plan; a list of the SC members is attached as Annex 1.

Data Collection

– for a total of three weeks the evaluation team will gather data from all sources included in the work plan at national and local level, through interviews with key informants and review of relevant documents.

Analysis and Reporting

– the evaluation team will analyze data and prepare the evaluation report over a three week period. This involves preparing the preliminary report based on the analysis of findings, submitting the report key stakeholders for factual review as well as presenting the findings and conclusions to stakeholders and gathering feedback.

Evaluation principles and methodology -

The evaluation team will formulate and detail the methodology for the evaluation which will be informed by the key methodological principles below:

The evaluation is results focused; The evaluation will adopt a consultative, iterative and transparent approach with

stakeholders; Triangulation of information and data across groups of stakeholders and individuals will

be the key method to validate evidence, throughout the whole evaluation process; The evaluation is cost-effective; The evaluation will use a wide range of methods and tools, adapted to the national

context and to the evaluation questions. They may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Debriefing sessions with the stakeholders (inception, data collection, analysis phases); Evaluation matrix relating evaluation issues and questions to evaluation criteria,

indicators, sources of information and methods of data collection (inception phase); Desk review of reference documents (inception and data collection phase); Individual and group interviews with stakeholders including representatives from MDA's,

LGA's Civil Society, Media, Private Sector, and Development Partners.

Checklists or semi-structured interview protocols for each type of interview (inception phase);

Field observation (data collection phase); Thematic studies on specific areas of focus of NACSAP II, as relevant and appropriate

(data collection phase);

Lessons learning workshop which brings together all the key stakeholders and implementers of the program (what worked well, and, why? what didn't work well, and, why? what can we learn and what can we do about it in future).

Deliverables:

An inception report: the evaluation team shall prepare an inception report containing a detailed work plan, review of literature, interpretation of the suggested evaluation questions and observations, detailed methods, draft instruments and an evaluation matrix.

Presentation of and preliminary findings: At the end of the field work, the evaluation team will present their draft findings and provisional recommendations. The evaluation team will also make a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the main findings recommendations and lessons learned and conclusions

Draft Report: The evaluation team will prepare a draft report for comments by stakeholders. This should be a focused document containing an executive summary, background, introduction findings, conclusions, recommendations, lessons learned and annexes. It should also clearly state the recommendations for the future national approach to address corruption.

Final Report: Based on the comments received from stakeholders, the evaluation team shall submit four hard copies and an electronic version of the final report. The final report will include the following with sections e.g. a minimum 2 pages executive summary containing key findings and recommendations; a maximum of one page background; an Introduction; the approach employed for data collection and analysis; findings, conclusions; recommendations; Lessons Learned and annexes will be prepared and presented to relevant stakeholders in Dar es Salaam.

Timeframe -

It is estimated that the evaluation team will conduct their work over a nine week period, commencing from 1August 2011. Below is a suggested indicative timeline for the phases and deliverables of the evaluation.

Activities:

Inceptiono Initial Briefingo Review of documentso Drafting Inception Report

Outputs -

Inception Report containing

o A detailed work plan,o review of Literature,

o Interpretation of the suggested evaluation questions and observations on their relevance;

o Detailed methods,o Draft instruments ando An evaluation matrix.o Presentation to Quality Assurance Team -

Timeline: 2 weeks

Activities

Fieldwork

o Interviews with stakeholderso Field Visitso Reviewing & analyzingo informationo Mid Evaluation Debriefing

Outputs:

o Interview Coverage completedo Agreed field stations visitedo Debriefing with the quality assurance team

Timeline: 5 weeks

Activities

Reporting and presentation (findings)

Drafting the Report

Presenting the report to Stakeholders

Finalizing the report

Output

Draft Report

Presentation to Stakeholders

Inputs from stakeholders

Final Report

Timeline: 2 weeks

Stakeholder Involvement:

There is a range of country-level stakeholders who have been involved in the NACSAP implementation including; implementing partners, development partners and non-government organizations.

Stakeholders will be asked to support the evaluation by facilitating access to information (such as documents and people) and providing information directly to the evaluation team. PCCB will provide additional logistical support to the evaluation team as per the contract and contribute in-kind support (for example, office space).

Accountabilities and Responsibilities:

The following section outlines the evaluation management responsibilities as well as those of the evaluation team.

The facilitator, PCCB will, in consultation and agreement with the National Steering Committee will commission the evaluation manager and oversee the process assuring the independence of the evaluation and that the final product complies with the highest standards in evaluation. PCCB will provide secretariat support to the evaluation and be responsible for:

Assessing the tenders and managing the consultant recruitment process of the independent evaluation team

Overseeing the evaluation process throughout its entire duration

Managing the evaluation budget including drafting financial reports.

Designing a schedule of visits to regional and district stakeholders in line with the evaluation plan,

Facilitating the work of the independent evaluation team by ensuring that all relevant contacts and information are available.

Coordinating stakeholder workshops in consultation with key stakeholders, and the evaluation team including, among other things: drafting the agenda, identifying materials for consultation and distribution, coordinating with participants; and drafting the stakeholder report.

In similar consultation with the National Steering Committee, PCCB will also prepare a management response on the final evaluation report. There will be a quality assurance committee whose members will be selected from the Steering Committee members; and whose main duty will be to put in place a plan for quality assurance; facilitate the review of the evaluation process products including ensuring that the views of stakeholders are considered during the evaluation.

Principles for undertaking the assignment:

Review existing documentation with regard to anti-corruption including NACSAP II document and periodic reports, MKUKUTA Strategies, and other relevant partner documents; consult extensively with national authorities, UN personnel, strategic partners, relevant national and international organizations and donors and individuals.

In recommending the way forward, the consultant/s should consider the country context, including funding prospects and the cultural and socio-political dynamics and the long term nature of fighting corruption as recently described by the World Bank, among others.

Competencies

The evaluation team will be comprised of two evaluation professionals:

one international and one national consultant; who as a team, have a solid understanding of the national context, the anti-corruption agenda and a proven track record of conducting evaluations in a professional manner. To the extent possible the composition of the evaluation team will be gender balanced and utilize regionally based expertise. Full competency in English (written and spoken) is required. Kiswahili will be considered an advantage.

Required Skills and Experience

o The international consultant should have the following qualifications:o Master degree from a recognized university in Law, Political Science,

International Development or other relevant fields.o A minimum of 10 years of professional experience specifically in the area of

evaluation of international development initiatives and development organizations.

o A specialist in anti-corruption programming and initiatives in developing/LDC countries.

o Substantial international track record of conducting different types of evaluations, including process, outcome and impact evaluations in different countries and organizations.

o Experience in M&E of cross-cutting issues including human rights, gender and culture.

o Knowledge and experience of the UN System and the UN Reform process.o Understanding of the development context in Tanzania would be a clear

advantage.o Excellent communication and interview skills.o Excellent report writing skills.o Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines.

The national consultant should have the following qualifications:

o Master degree from a recognized university in Law, Political Science, International Development or other relevant fields.

o A minimum of seven years of professional experience, specifically in the area of monitoring and evaluation of international development initiatives and development organizations.

o A track record of conducting various types of evaluations, including process, outcome and impact evaluations in Tanzania and preferably in the region.

o Experience in M&E of cross-cutting issues including human rights, gender and culture.

o Knowledge and experience of the UN System and the UN Reform process.o In-depth understanding of the development context in Tanzania.o Excellent communication and interview skills.o Excellent report writing skills.o Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results with strict deadlines.

UNDP is committed to achieving workforce diversity in terms of gender, nationality and culture. Individuals from minority groups, indigenous groups and persons with disabilities are equally encouraged to apply. All applications will be treated with the strictest confidence.