VSOs Experience so far on Value for Money Sara Cottingham, Deputy Policy Director BOND 3 rd February 2011

Why Value for Money?

Overall Framework for VfM Development Outcomes for poor and marginalised women and men - quantifying quality, estimating direct beneficiaries reached Investment for Results – processes for decision making e.g. participatory programme reviews, quality framework, portfolio review Efficiency – fiduciary risk in operational practices (e.g. procurement), % overheads

Why Value for Money?

Quantifying Quality - Advocacy success scale for use with partners 1.Identifying the issue 2. Research conducted 3. Strategy developed 4. Issue in public domain 5. Policy makers agree need to address issue 6. Policy change/blocks to effective implementation removed 7. Policy change Implemented 8. M&E - is it positively impacting on primary stakeholders (beneficiaries)

VfM Analysis: approaches tried so far 1. Social Return on Investment – 2 studies by New Economics Foundation What worked well – shared values, beneficiary and stakeholder participation, attribution Challenges - partners cannot be forced to implement, 44 countries, 1,700 partners too complex for SROI, valuable for long term tracking

2. Case study approach Rwanda Disability Programme In 2009/ international volunteers and programme spend of £121,803 contributed to: 11 National Disabled Peoples Organisations to improve their capacity to : Represent disabled people in rural areas and of disabled women, Having a good governance, leadership and transparency, Providee improved services to their members A Disability Programme has been developed and disabled people have been recognised as one of the 4 priority groups in the Social Protection Strategy, DIRECT REACH: (disabled people members of the 11 DPOs) - 35,950 Disabled People reached through policy change - 617,002

Ethiopia Education programme In 2009/ International Volunteers and programme spend of £294,448 contributed to: 7 Regional Education Bureaus improved capacity to deliver in-service teacher training programmes resulting in: - improved classroom learning-teaching - school environment conducive to learning and involving the community in their School Improvement Programmes - Building of segregated latrines 33 Colleges of Teacher Education improved capacity to roll out Continuous Professional Development in schools primary school teachers (356 females) trained and improved skills and 62,530 students (30,795 females) registered in their schools directly benefiting - Primary schools demonstrate more participatory teaching methods - Teachers solve classroom management-related issues and needs of students - Improved IT capacity DIRECT REACH: 3,721 schools, 49,277 teachers, 2,021,855 children (981,664 girls) and 104,802 teacher trainees

Case studies What worked well – clear, easy to communicate, data base formed Challenges – no cost comparators (as yet), how to factor in scale

3. How does VSO work through the Value Chain? Economy: Costs into Inputs e.g. costs of recruiting and training a long-term volunteer and supporting them overseas are around £7,500 per year, this compares favourably with the average costs of a consultant at £10,000 per month (based on £500/day) as well as with the average costs of an international aid worker whose salary would be £2,500 per month (conservatively based on £30,000pa). For this sum (with a local wage often provided by the partner organisation), partners have access to long term technical expertise, training, mentoring, and other support as required. (PPA evaluation).The 2010 external evaluation of the human resources element of the Malawi health sector programme (SWAP) found VSO volunteers to be cost effective when compared to other volunteers in similar roles

Efficiency: Inputs into Outputs VSO evaluates its outputs against its progress towards partner and programme and corporate objectives corresponding to its Theory of Change: Individuals empowered, civil society strengthened, basic services are better quality and more inclusive, pro poor policies progressed

3. Effectiveness: Outputs into Outcomes Where Outcomes are defined as changes for poor women and men – the ultimate beneficiaries VSO claims a contribution towards outcomes but Does not claim attribution nor does it want to! Direct beneficiaries reached participate through focus groups and nos. are estimated by partners.

Starting to link the Value Chain What could go well - potential of Value Chain for analysis of approaches to development, to involve both volunteers and partners, and to be realistic, to be used at different levels Challenges – Needs more research and thinking to complete and systematise at national (back to case studies) and thematic levels

Learning Difficult to compare operational costs across countries Attribution for a capacity building agency Numbers trump quality No unit costs as yet Multiple not single interventions by VSO No comparators, and are they desirable? Too many definitions of terms

Thank you