Background Initiated by the MDB Working Group on MfDR 2004

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Harmonized support to scaling up the national AIDS response Ini Huijts 7 th June 2006 ODI meeting, London.
Advertisements

Comparative Study of MOPAN and EvalNet Approaches to Assessing Multilateral Organizations’ Development Effectiveness James Melanson Director, Development.
Results Reporting by Donor Agencies (DAC/WP EFF – Cluster MfDR) Presented by Adrian Maître, SDC, and Daniel Low-Beer, GFATM EU Expert Group on Results,
Update on the Multilateral Effectiveness Initiative James Melanson Director of Evaluation CIDA DAC Network on Development Evaluation June 2013.
Ongoing Work of the Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results (JV MfDR) Stefan Schmitz, Senior Policy Advisor Aid Effectiveness OECD Development.
Elaine Ireland Policy Adviser: Global Health Global Health Policy Forum 9 th September 2010 Aid Effectiveness in the Health Sector: A civil society perspective.
1 General Budget Support Presentation by the Ministry of Finance.
Evaluation Cooperation Group Presentation to the DAC Network on Development Evaluation 9/10 November 2004 Role and functioning of the Evaluation Cooperation.
UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water 1 | Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water GLAAS Presented by Rolf.
High-level forum on strategic planning for statistics: Bishkek, May 2006 Why statistics? Why strategic planning? Presentation by PARIS21 Secretariat.
Results Focus in MDBs: Where Are We? Philibert Afrika, AfDB February 4, 2004.
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Statistical Division Statistical Capacity Building Activities Relative to the SPECA Countries Fifth meeting.
Development Cooperation and Partnerships Strategy ( ) October 2014 KIM Lumang Bopata Policy Department.
Roundtable #4 Democratic ownership: Managing for Development results and Mutual Accountability.
Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications DETEC Federal Office for the Environment FOEN Biodiversity Finance Reporting.
Caribbean Community Secretariat 2nd meeting of the Advisory Group on Statistics San Ignacio – Belize 25 June 2008 Introduction and Objectives of NSDS day.
Evaluation of sector programmes and budget support operations in the context of EU development cooperation 1 st M&E Network Forum 07 to 08 November 2011.
FUNCTION 5: MONITORING M5 – S1. 1.Situation Monitoring 2.Humanitarian Response Monitoring 3.Coordination Performance Monitoring Types of Monitoring.
Country Actions Regional perspective Latin America and Caribbean.
Presented by CIDA on behalf of the Task Team on Multilateral Effectiveness.
AID EFFECTIVENESS A GLANCE FROM GLOBAL TO COUNTRY LEVELS Cao Manh Cuong Foreign Economic Relations Dept. Ministry of Planning and Investment.
European Commission Joint Evaluation Unit common to EuropeAid, Relex and Development Methodology for Evaluation of Budget support operations at Country.
Education and MDGs The MDGs provided a powerful framework However, there are weaknesses: – Equity – Interconnectivity of issues – Sustainable development.
Country Results and Accountability Agreements EU experts meeting on results Brussels 16 November 2011.
The Philippines’ Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines An Introduction.
Developing Consensus Principles and Standards for Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (GRPPs) Progress Report to the Fifth Meeting of the.
AfCoP and the AAA Reflections on future engagement By Richard Ssewakiryanga
WHO EURO In Country Coordination and Strengthening National Interagency Coordinating Committees.
Recent Developments of the PEFA Program Video-conference of the PEMPAL BCOP PEFA Working Group February 20, 2009 Frans Ronsholt Head of PEFA Secretariat.
Using results frameworks to shift the focus of evaluation to a strategic level Emerging research on the principles underpinning results frameworks Kate.
Core Principles and Action Plan February 4, 2004.
MULTILATERAL ORGANISATION PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT NETWORK The MOPAN Common Approach 2009 Presentation to DAC Network on Development Evaluation 15 June 2009.
What is CSO Development Effectiveness? Presentation at the European Seminar on CSO Development Effectiveness, Vienna, 10 and 11 March 2010.
Launch of the 2008 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration. Christian SHINGIRO External Finance Unit.
“AID EFFECTIVENESS AND HEALTH Challenges and opportunities Marielle Hart Action for Global Health.
Developing a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework: Insight into internal stakeholder learnings Beth Ferguson AES Conference Sydney 2 September 2011.
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
More Timely, Credible and Cost Effective Performance Information on Multilateral Partners Presented by: Goberdhan Singh Director of the Evaluation Division.
Key Components of a successful Proposal OAS / IACML Workshop on Technical Assistance. San José, Costa Rica May 8, 2007 By: José Luis Alvarez R. Consultant.
REVIEW OF JAR EXPERIENCES MAIN FINDINGS IHP+ Nairobi Meeting December
Monitoring & Evaluation System “Learning to Improve” Making evidence work for development.
The Global Partnership Monitoring Framework Purpose and Scope of Monitoring, Role of Participating Countries UNDP-OECD support team Copenhagen, 12 June,
SDGs implementation: key challenges and role played by SAIs
Approaches to Partnership
CABRI response to Accra Action Agenda
ICELANDIC DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION
Reference Group Meeting 11 – 13 February 2009
Vincent Grimaud, Head of Unit
Evaluation Cooperation Group
Aims of the workshop PARIS21 Workshop Accra July 2005.
UNDP-UNEP POVERTY & ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE (PEI): MID-TERM REVIEW
Aid for Development Effectiveness -Managing for Development Results-
Results of the Organizational Performance
COLLABORATIVE COUNTRY ASSISTANCE STRATEGIES
Alignment and Results in Development Co-operation
Objectives of the Forum
Quality in Evaluation: the international development experience
The Role of the World Bank in Supporting Statistical Capacity in Africa Graham Eele.
ReDSS is supporting the JSC, EIDACS and SDSC consortia to…
International perspective
Statistical Capacity Building
Appraising result framework
Proposed Approach to Strengthening Information on Development Effectiveness of Multilateral Organizations Presented by: Goberdhan Singh for the Task Team.
Appraising result framework
Objective of the workshop
(Further) Improving Development Cooperation
Appraising result framework
Management for Development Results
Capacity development and Financing data for development
Presentation transcript:

Background Initiated by the MDB Working Group on MfDR 2004 Response to international commitments Response to external agency performance assessments - Proliferation of monitoring systems the last few years – both from international events (Rome, Marrakech, Paris) from bilateral donors (MEFF, MOPAN + others) and from multilateral organizations (MDGs, IDA/ADF Measurement Systems, GMR). - Increasing concerns with assessment and reporting of performance - Danger that some of this performance data and comparisons are superficial and not reliable - MfDR Working Group of results therefore initiated a process to develop a Common Performance Assessment System

Purpose Provide a common source of information on how the MDBs are contributing to development results (outputs and outcomes) and improving this contribution over time We had particularly the Global Monitoring Report in mind when initiating the process. The GMR has through the last two years turned into an important report on IFIs’ contribution to achieving the MDGs The 2006 GMR will also include reporting on MDBs performance – and the COMPAS is potentially an important source of information It is however important to keep in mind that GMR is published by the WB and is not a joint MDB product

Principles Strong ownership by all the MDBs – joint responsibility for the report Common framework for gathering and presenting information Focus on collective performance by the MDBs as a group Limited transactions costs in the preparation of the COMPAS report Transparency (full disclosure of the COMPAS report) Joint ownership is a key here – this needs to be a joint product. We have decided to rotate the responsibility with producing the report with the chairmanship of the MDB working group. Currently AsDB has this position and we will be in charge of producing the report We have to limit the transaction cost and basically use existing resources

Selection criteria Relevance to results (only in relation to the MfDR agenda) Coverage (process indicators - applicability to all the MDBs, results indicators - at least two Banks with data and others have stated their intention to develop them Comparability (broadly comparable - thorough analysis of definitions ongoing) Data availability (existing data)

Process Piloting 2005/2006 Refinement and revision 2006/2007 The emphasis on managing for development results refers to the fact that the results focus is to be integrated into all aspects of management, not just the monitoring side, and to be used for lesson-learning as much as for accountability. There is a close interconnection between measuring, monitoring and managing functions. Five key principles for MfDR were endorsed by the heads of the MDBs and the OECD-DAC at the Second Roundtable on Managing for Results in 2004.[1] These are: Focus the dialogue on results at all phases of the development process Align programming, monitoring and evaluation with results Keep measurement and reporting simple Manage for not by results Use results information for learning and decision-making These principles provide normative guidance on how agencies should implement MfDR and are an important first step towards harmonisation. However, they do not provide any indication of which activities, processes and products would be affected by MfDR or how they should be changed [1] See Joint Marrakech Memorandum, February 2004, op cit.