REFORM TALKS with Lawal Zakari
As rightly observed by global development experts – the missing link between policy promises and real results lies in systematic monitoring and evaluation. This fundamental insight has never been more relevant to Nigeria’s governance challenges than it is today.
Every few years, Nigeria launches another ambitious reform program. The reforms include: economic, agricultural, digital, health, education transformation initiatives and programs among others. Each reform comes with fanfare, policy documents, and promises of transformation. Yet for millions of Nigerians, life remains largely unchanged. Why do these reforms consistently fail to deliver? The answer is not poor policies or insufficient funding—it is the persistent gap between what governments promise and what they actually deliver. Bridging this “implementation gap” requires something most Nigerian reform programs lack: robust implementation monitoring and evaluation systems to track progress, identify problems early, and course-correct when things go wrong.
Consider Nigeria’s recent reform history. The National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) promised economic transformation in the early 2000s. The Transformation Agenda of 2011-2015 targeted infrastructure and economic diversification. The Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP 2017-2020) aimed to pull Nigeria out of recession and the post-COVID 19 Economic Sustainability Plan and the National Poverty Reduction with Growth Strategy (NPRGS 2021-2031) aimed at lifting 100 million Nigerians out of poverty within a decade. Recently also, President Tinubu undertook some economic reforms that include the Removal of Fuel Subsidy, the Market Exchange Rate reforms and the establishment of regional development commissions to address Nigeria’s geographic diversity and region-specific challenges, focusing on sub-national infrastructure delivery, post-conflict recovery, and local economic development. Each had merit, yet tangible improvements for ordinary Nigerians remained elusive. This pattern repeats at state level too. Governors announce government initiatives, agricultural modernization programs, and healthcare reforms with great ceremony. Opposition parties criticize, civil society expresses scepticism, but the programs proceed anyway—often with minimal tracking of whether they’re actually working. The result? Billions of naira spent with little to show for it, while citizens grow increasingly cynical about government promises.
The problems begin with how reforms are conceived and managed. Most Nigerian reform programs suffer from predictable weaknesses. Policy happens in isolation. Reforms are often designed in Abuja or state capitals with minimal input from the agencies that must implement them or the citizens they’re meant to serve. When reality meets policy, the mismatch becomes apparent—but often too late to adjust course effectively. Nobody’s really watching. While reforms may include monitoring components, these are typically compliance exercises focused on spending budgets rather than achieving results. There’s rarely systematic tracking of whether programs are actually improving citizens’ lives
Politics trumps evidence. When problems arise, the response is usually political rather than technical. Rather than examining data to understand what’s working and what isn’t, officials either blame external factors or simply push forward with original plans regardless of evidence. Coordination breakdowns are inevitable. Nigeria’s federal structure means most reforms require coordination between federal, state, and local governments. Without systematic monitoring of these relationships, coordination failures go undetected until they become crises. Capacity gaps get ignored. Many reforms assume implementation capacity that does n0t exist. Without monitoring these gaps, governments continue announcing ambitious programs while lacking the people, systems, or processes necessary to deliver them.
The solution is not abandoning reform—it is making reform work through systematic Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). Think of M&E as the GPS system for government programs: it tells you where you are, whether you are heading in the right direction, and when you need to change course. Effective M&E does three critical things. It provides early warning systems. Rather than waiting until the end of a program to discover it failed, good M&E identifies problems while there’s still time to fix them. It enables evidence-based adjustments. M&E generates the data needed to improve programs continuously. It creates accountability pressure. When program performance is tracked and reported regularly, it becomes much harder for officials to ignore problems or misrepresent results.
Nigeria actually has several examples of successful M&E driving reform effectiveness. The National Social Investment Programme reaches millions of Nigerians partly because it invested in systematic beneficiary tracking and payment monitoring. While the program faces criticism about long-term impact, its M&E systems enable it to demonstrate reach and identify implementation problems quickly. Lagos State’s digital transformation succeeds where other states struggle because it combines technical innovation with systematic monitoring of citizen satisfaction and service performance. Regular feedback loops enable continuous service improvements. Kaduna State’s public service reforms gained traction because they included comprehensive performance measurement systems that tracked both efficiency improvements and citizen satisfaction. This evidence base helped maintain political support despite initial resistance. These examples share common features: clear performance indicators, regular data collection, systematic analysis of results, and—crucially—using findings to improve program implementation.
For M&E to bridge Nigeria’s implementation gap, it must be designed for Nigerian realities. Start with clear theories of change for the reform initiatives. Before implementing any reform, governments should articulate exactly how they expect activities to lead to desired outcomes. This provides the foundation for monitoring whether the theory is working in practice. Design for Nigeria’s federal structure. M&E systems must work across federal, state, and local government levels while accommodating Nigeria’s diversity. This means standardized frameworks that allow local adaptation. Leverage technology intelligently. Nigeria’s mobile phone penetration and growing tech sector create opportunities for cost-effective data collection and real-time monitoring. But technology must serve clear purposes, not become an end in itself. Build internal capacity systematically. Rather than relying on external consultants, governments should invest in developing internal M&E expertise that can provide sustained support for reform programs. Engage citizens meaningfully. M&E systems should include systematic mechanisms for collecting citizen feedback and demonstrating how this feedback influences program improvements. The government for effective citizen participation can leverage on the EYEMARK a citizen based Web Application designed and being operationalised by the National M&E Department.
To enhance delivery of reforms initiatives, Nigerian governments can start by selecting priority reform programs and retrofit them with basic M&E systems. Focus on simple indicators that can be tracked regularly and used for program management decisions. Strengthen the M&E units of the key reform implementing agencies with dedicated staff and clear mandates. Develop partnerships with Nigerian universities and National Monitoring and Evaluation Department of the Federal Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning to build M&E capacities and expertise of the M&E Units of the Agencies. Once the selected reforms initiatives whose M&E has been strengthened prove their value, the government can then expand the strengthening of the M&E systems to additional reform programs. Similarly, to strengthen the institutionalization and sustainability of the M&E processes the government should embed M&E requirements in legislation and budget processes (legislate the current National M&E Policy of 2022 which has administrative approval only into law) to ensure continuity across political administrations.
Nigeria cannot afford continued reform failures. With a growing population, mounting development challenges, and increasing citizen expectations, the country needs government programs that actually work. The cost of building effective M&E systems pales in comparison to the resources wasted on ineffective programs and the opportunities lost through poor implementation. International experience demonstrates that countries with strong M&E systems consistently outperform those without them in delivering development results. Rwanda’s post-genocide transformation, Botswana’s sustained development progress, and Ghana’s democratic consolidation all feature systematic M&E as a core component of effective governance.
Nigeria’s reform challenge isn’t unique, but its scale and complexity make effective solutions urgent. Moving beyond “hope-based implementation” toward evidence-driven reform management requires political leaders who value results over rhetoric and citizens who demand accountability for public investments. The building blocks exist: Nigeria has dedicated public servants, growing technical capacity, and increasing citizen engagement. What’s needed is the political will to systematically track whether government programs are working and the institutional commitment to use that information for continuous improvement. M&E isn’t a silver bullet—no single intervention can solve Nigeria’s governance challenges. But it is an essential tool for making reforms work. Countries that master the art of implementation through systematic monitoring and evaluation consistently outperform those that don’t.
For Nigeria to realize its vast potential, its governments must move beyond the cycle of policy announcement and implementation failure.
Mr. Lawal Zakari is former Director National Monitoring & Evaluation, FMB&EP, and Chief Executive Officer of Tazaar Management Consultants Ltd
