Potential Indicators to Track Local Government Performance Improvements Through a Capacity Building Program in Romania - Research Report

Jul 19, 2026

The report examines monitoring and evaluation (M&E) culture in Romania and identifies how capacity-building initiatives can improve local government performance management. It reviews the evolution of M&E after EU accession in 2007, contrasts EU-funded program practices with gaps in nationally funded programs, and highlights limitations in using performance indicators and post-implementation evaluation. It then maps indicator systems aligned with strategic frameworks and proposes potential indicators to track improvements.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages21

Reading Time53 min

Monitoring and Evaluation culture in Romania

Early start of M&E practices in Romania

M&E in the context of EU Funded Programs

M&E in the context of National Funded Programs

System of indicators pertaining to relevant strategic frameworks

National Urban Development Strategy 2022-2035

Other funding programs

Potential indicators to track local government performance improvements

Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Potential indicators to track local government performance improvements through a capacity building program in Romania -Research Report APRIL 2023 Author: Cristina Zamfir Task Team Leader: Carli Venter This report was supported by the Sustainable Urban and Regional Development program (SURGE) [add hyperlink], a World Bank Umbrella Multi-Donor Trust Fund financed by the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) . TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. Monitoring and Evaluation culture in Romania................................................... 3 1.1 Early start of M&E practices in Romania ...................................................................... 3 1.2 M&E in the context of EU Funded Programs................................................................ 3 1.3 M&E in the context of National Funded Programs........................................................ 6 SECTION 2. System of indicators pertaining to relevant strategic frameworks....................... 7 2.1 National Urban Development Strategy 2022-2035 ....................................................... 7 2.2 Other funding programs ............................................................................................... 9 SECTION 3. Potential indicators to track local government performance improvements.......19 SECTION 1. Monitoring and Evaluation culture in Romania In Romania, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) practices have undergone significant changes over the past few decades. Following Romania's accession to the European Union (EU) in 2007, there has been a marked increase in the importance of M&E for strategies, programs, and projects. The EU's strong focus on accountability and results- based management, coupled with its requirements for programs and projects funded by EU resources, has been a driving force behind the development of M&E practices in Romania. However, while M&E practices are well-established for EU and donor-funded programs, there is still room for improvement for nationally funded programs. For example, the largest national program for local development in Romania lacks performance indicators or post-implementation evaluation components. 1.1 Early start of M&E practices in Romania Before Romania joined the EU in 2007, the country had limited capacity for M&E of strategies, programs and projects. This was partly due to Romania's transition from a centrally planned to a market-oriented economy, which required the government to focus on building new institutions and infrastructure. As a result, M&E activities were not seen as a priority, and there was a lack of awareness about their importance in ensuring accountability and improving public policies and programs. A study1 conducted in 2006 found that evaluation practices were developing primarily for donor-funded programs, rather than for the Romanian national budget. Demand for external evaluation services was low, and there was little institutionalization of evaluation in local government bodies. While there was a small pool of evaluators in different disciplines, their capacity needed to be further developed, and there was no organization of professional evaluators in Romania. The reporting culture in Romania tended to focus on output or process evaluation, rather than outcome evaluation. Although there was a culture of reporting in the Romanian administration, data was not collected systematically. 1.2 M&E in the context of EU Funded Programs After Romania joined the EU in 2007, M&E practices became increasingly important in managing public policies and programs within the country. The EU's focus on accountability and results-based management played a vital role in the development of M&E systems. For programs that receive funding from the EU, the European Commission (EC) has established a comprehensive framework that includes regular reporting requiremen

FAQs

How did Romania’s EU accession in 2007 affect monitoring and evaluation practices?

EU accession increased the importance of M&E for strategies, programs, and projects due to accountability and results-based management requirements.

What gap remains in monitoring and evaluation for nationally funded programs?

While EU and donor-funded programs use established M&E practices, nationally funded programs still need improvement, including cases where performance indicators or post-implementation evaluation components are missing.

What are the report’s main components for improving local government performance tracking?

The report reviews M&E culture, analyzes indicator systems tied to strategic frameworks, and proposes potential indicators to monitor local government performance improvements through capacity building.

Jul 19, 2026

Upload by Olivia Brown