Services are failing poor people! This is the damning declaration contained in the World Development Report (WDR) 2004 that first alerted the world to the state of service delivery and the urgent need to improve basic services, particularly for the poor. Ten years on, and despite advances in expanding service delivery, this assessment continues to hold true: the poorest and most marginalized are paying for sub-standard services or are deprived of basic services altogether (Wild and Foresti 2013, 2).

This paper looks at strategies aimed at improving responsiveness and accountability
in service delivery by supporting service users to act collectively to influence key decisions, monitor service quality and demand better services. These strategies, generally referred to as social accountability approaches, have drawn the attention of donors, program implementers and social movements alike in their quest to address development challenges. Social accountability approaches can range from the dissemination of patient charters and budget literacy campaigns to client exit interviews, public expenditure tracking and community scorecards.

There are multiple pathways through which service users can influence and make demands on public officials
and service providers to improve the access and quality of services they receive. Users can engage directly and indirectly with different levels of, and actors within, the service delivery system, including with support from the media and civil society organizations (CSOs). Through
the work of other stakeholders with oversight and enforcement capacities such as local government officials and the courts, they are also able to extend their influence.

The social accountability conceptual framework (see Figure 1 below) is premised on the idea that by increasing users’ access to information about their rights, entitlements and service performance, and by providing them with opportunities to act on this information, they can be empowered to engage public actors, influence decisions and demand better, more effective public policies and service delivery. This is reflected through their exercise of:

  • Choice with regard to whether or not to access services and which services to use; 

  • Voice in decision-making about service delivery priorities; and 

  • Oversight of service delivery as it relates to respect for norms, standards and entitlements. 


As a result of these efforts, social accountability initiatives are thought to stimulate greater accountability and increased responsiveness from policy makers and service providers to the needs, preferences and demands of service users, which ultimately result in service improvements. 


This framework is, however, founded on a number of assumptions which need to be unpacked and tested. They include assumptions about how people access and process information, and their capacity and incentives to take action. There are also assumptions about policy makers and service providers’ capacity and incentives to be accountable and responsive to users, as well as the effects that this can have on service delivery.

  • There are a number of important factors that can constrain or enable the success of social accountability interventions.
  • The evidence on the impact of social accountability initiatives is so far limited and inconclusive.
  • Building on its 
past experiences, the IRC, through continued investment in social accountability programming and ongoing collaboration between its technical teams, is well positioned to further experiment with these processes and learn from them.


 

Available documents & links