National Dialogue on Independent Monitoring of National Social Investment Program in Nigeria
Nigeria’s large and growing population has strained economic opportunities and overstretched social infrastructure, deepening widespread poverty. In response, the Federal Government launched the National Social Investment Program (NSIP, 2016-24) to alleviate poverty and promote social inclusion.
The scale and complexity of the NSIP required reliable data to inform policy decisions, improve program delivery, and ensure accountability. In light of this, the government introduced independent monitoring (IM) as a mechanism to provide real-time feedback from the field, track implementation, and strengthen transparency. The IM program brought in large number of citizens to monitor and report on the implementation of the NSIP.
The National Dialogue on Independent Monitoring of the NSIP was convened in November 2024 as part of a study that aimed to document the large-scale monitoring of the social investment program. This learning exchange was convened to provide a platform for front-line duty bearers—including independent monitors and program coordinators—to share their experiences, analyze implementation barriers, and explore mechanisms for more effective monitoring.
The Learning Exchange Workshop was as a timely and reflective convening. With both the NSIP and the IM program indefinitely suspended, the exchange provided a crucial opportunity to look back, assess the program’s legacy, and harvest lessons for the design of future social accountability mechanisms. One of the most distinctive features of this exchange was the active participation of state IM coordinators, whose frontline experiences offered deep insights into how the program functioned in practice. These coordinators operated at the intersection of national oversight and grassroots implementation, making their voices essential for understanding the real-world effectiveness, risks, and impacts of the IM model. Their stories and reflections provided a balanced view of the program’s strengths and weaknesses, beyond what national-level reporting could offer.
Independent monitors who were especially active in the program highlighted positive outcomes, including:
• strengthened monitoring capacity at local and state levels
• real-time data collection and reporting
• space for citizen voice and participation in evaluating NSIP delivery.
However, the learning exchange workshop also brought to light several weaknesses which included:
• recruitment of monitors based on political affiliation rather than competence or interest in the job’s mission
• infrastructural and logistical constraints that limited the quality, reliability, and coverage of the data
• operational delays, especially due to late disbursement of payments to field monitors
• inconsistent communication between the national and state levels.
Overall, the exchange highlighted the enduring relevance of independent monitoring for governance and accountability in Nigeria’s social programs. It also underscored the importance of grounding future designs in the lived experiences of coordinators and field actors who directly engaged with communities. As conversations around the future of social investment programming in Nigeria continue, this retrospective analysis offers a foundation for bringing the experience of independent monitors to bear on building resilient and responsive monitoring frameworks in the future.
