Part III Assessing resources Although PETS can be very useful, they are quite challenging to conduct. In particular, accessing relevant information can be difficult. Financial records are often not disaggregated beyond the district level, which can make it hard to see how resources flow to municipalities or villages. They can also take a long time to complete; between 8-12 months, and sometimes longer. 12.6.2. Community score cards Community Score Cards are “a community-based monitoring tool with a strong focus on empowerment and accountability as it includes an interface meeting between service providers and the community that allows for immediate feedback on quality and adequacy of services provided in the community”. Source: World Bank (2005), Social Development Notes, SD Note 100 As a type of survey, community score cards (CSC) can be a useful data collection tool for measuring public services against the AAAQ criteria (see Chapter 7). But they can also be helpful in uncovering gaps between inputs (what funds did the community receive?), outputs (how were the funds used?) and outcomes (how did the projects affect the community?) of government expenditures. There are various approaches for conducting CSC. For example, the World Bank suggests preparing an input tracking scorecard, a community-generated performance scorecard and a service provider selfassessment scorecard, which are then discussed collectively at an “interface” meeting. Nevertheless, a key feature is that the community as a whole can express their level of satisfaction with a particular service or facility. A humorous approach to community score cards is shown in the example below. Example: Scoring budgetary information Transparency indicator Grading key Availability of budget information A – Out of this world Timeliness of budget information B – Damn good Accuracy of budget information C – Not too impressive User-friendliness of budget information D – Quite bad, actually Comprehensiveness of budget information E – Very disappointing F – Terrible G – Worse than you can imagine Source: OHCHR, HRBA Training Materials (not dated) Although CSC focus on the community as a whole, ensuring that different perspectives within the community are captured, including the most disadvantaged, is crucial. For example, women, ethnic minorities and others may have very different experiences of service provision. It is critical that these perspectives are captured in the CSC; for example, by ensuring questions are framed to accommodate different perspectives or conducting scoring exercises with particular groups. 12.6.3. Quantitive service delivery survey (QSDS) Quantitative service delivery surveys (QSDS) go beyond PETS, as they look at the efficiency of spending. It also attempts to quantify the factors affecting quality of service, such as incentives, accountability mechanisms, and the relationship between agents and principals. Chapter 12: Auditing public spending | 125