From Institutionalisation to Utilisation: Assessing the Functionality of Ghana's National Monitoring and Evaluation System

Ghana has progressively institutionalised monitoring and evaluation (M&E) within its national development-planning and decentralised governance systems. However, the existence of policies, institutional structures, reporting mechanisms and information systems does not necessarily demonstrate that M&E arrangements function consistently, generate comparable evidence, influence decisions or support organisational learning. This paper examines the extent to which Ghana's national M&E system has progressed from formal institutionalisation towards operational functionality, evidence utilisation and adaptive learning. Using a qualitative documentary case-study design, it synthesises statutory and policy documents, government M&E and performance reports, Ghana-specific empirical studies and comparative African evaluation literature. The paper introduces an Institutionalisation–Functionality–Utilisation–Learning Framework (IFULF) for distinguishing the existence of M&E architecture from its capacity to function reliably, influence consequential decisions and generate learning. It further develops the concept of evidence asymmetry to describe situations in which decentralised institutions operate under broadly comparable reporting requirements while possessing unequal technical, financial, informational and organisational capacities to generate evidence of comparable quality and usefulness. The analysis finds that Ghana has established a substantial formal M&E architecture, anchored in national development planning and extending to decentralised institutions. However, institutionalisation is stronger than operational functionality, while evidence production and routine reporting appear more established than systematic evaluation, consequential evidence use and adaptive learning. Uneven subnational capacity, resource constraints, data-quality and interoperability challenges, and weak feedback mechanisms remain important transition barriers. The paper argues that national M&E-system maturity should therefore be assessed not primarily by the presence of formal structures, but by the strength of the transitions from institutionalisation to functionality, functionality to utilisation, and utilisation to learning. Strengthening these transitions is critical to transforming an institutionalised M&E architecture into a functioning national evidence and learning system.