Community scorecards
A Community Scorecard is "a two-way and ongoing participatory tool for assessment, planning, monitoring and evaluation of services" (2007:1).
It is a practical way for service users to give systematic and constructive feedback to service providers. And it helps decision-makers make informed choices about improving services. It has been used as a tool to help governments improve how they meet citizens' rights.
There are five stages in implementing a scorecard:
- Planning and preparation. This includes (a) scoping and planning the exercise, and meeting key stakeholders, (b) identifying and training facilitators and (c) identifying service entitlements and what inputs should be provided.
- Community scoring. Firstly, community groups discuss what inputs they actually receive and any issues they have with a service. Then facilitators develop these into indicators and a matrix for scoring. Finally, community groups are invited to use the matrix to score service delivery. Groups should be disaggregated by wealth and/or gender.
- Service provider scoring. Go through the same process of generating issues, developing indicators and a matrix, and scoring performance with a group of staff working for the service provider.
- Interface meeting. Service users and providers share and discuss their matrices, their scores and the reasons behind them. They come up with a joint action plan for improvements.
- Follow up. The action plan should include who will monitor its implementation. The facilitators should write up a report and consider how it should be used. The scorecard process should be repeated.
The challenges reported include: introducing a new concept, managing conflicts, focusing on systems rather than individuals, and raising expectations too high. (2007:3)
Results
|
In 2004, a randomized field experiment in Uganda examined the effects of using community scorecards in 50 rural health centres. It found that, after a year, communities that used scorecards were more involved in monitoring centres and health workers were working harder. The study presents evidence of significant improvements in health indicators, including a 33% reduction in under 5 child mortality, attributable to the use of scorecards.
A rough calculation suggests that, during the experiment, the cost of averting a child's death was around $300. This is significantly cheaper than many other interventions. (Bjorkman & Svensson, 2009)
|
A 2005 World Bank paper noted the approach has been disseminated by the World Bank and is being used in Malawi, Tanzania, Armenia, Benin and India. The paper concludes that it, and adapted approaches, "are powerful and flexible instruments to promote social accountability in the delivery of services to poor communities, and thus to improve the achievement of pro-poor development outcomes". (2005a:1)
This conclusion is based on specific cases, rather than systematic evaluations.
For example, a community scorecard has been implemented in Gambia, focused on health and education and involving 3,500 citizens. A report describes that it identified approval ratings for specific inputs (e.g. adequacy of staff and facilities) and generated recommendations for community actions and for service-providers.
The report comments "there was strong support for the ... methodology and recommendation for the tool to be nurtured". (2005b)
Community Score Cards compared to Citizen Report Cards
| Citizen Report Card |
Community Score Card |
Unit - household/individual
Meant for macro level
Main output is demand side data on performance and actual scores
Implementation time longer (3-6 months)
Feedback later, through media
Information collected through questionnaires
|
Unit - Community
Meant for local level
Emphasis on immediate feedback and accountability, less on actual data
Implementation time short (3-6 weeks)
Information collected through focus group discussions
|
from: World Bank Participation & Civic Engagement Website, Dec 09
More information
