Evaluation Total ODA Impact Stefan Molund, SIDA Fourth meeting of the DAC Network on Development Evaluation, Paris, 30 – 31 March 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Advertisements

Environment & national PRSs - directions and dilemmas EPD Seminar Series May 2002.
Harmonized support to scaling up the national AIDS response Ini Huijts 7 th June 2006 ODI meeting, London.
1 Modalities for Supporting PRSs Finnish Aid in a PRS Context Helsinki Workshop May 2003.
Project Appraisal Module 5 Session 6.
When are Impact Evaluations (IE) Appropriate and Feasible? Michele Tarsilla, Ph.D. InterAction IE Workshop May 13, 2013.
Comparative Study of MOPAN and EvalNet Approaches to Assessing Multilateral Organizations’ Development Effectiveness James Melanson Director, Development.
The concepts/mechanisms/tools for developing a Joint Programme: Critical issues and UNDG Joint Programme Guidance and formats.
1 An Assessment of the First Three Years Consultative Group meeting Brussels 8 October 2002 Development Planning Unit.
DR MACIEJ JUNKIERT PRACOWNIA BADAŃ NAD TRADYCJĄ EUROPEJSKĄ Guide for Applicants.
Good Evaluation Planning – and why this matters Presentation by Elliot Stern to Evaluation Network Meeting January 16 th 2015.
Screen 1 of 24 Reporting Food Security Information Understanding the User’s Information Needs At the end of this lesson you will be able to: define the.
Ongoing Work of the Joint Venture on Managing for Development Results (JV MfDR) Stefan Schmitz, Senior Policy Advisor Aid Effectiveness OECD Development.
The Outcomes of the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) Aid Quality & Architecture Division Development Co-operation Directorate OECD.
Knowledge Translation Curriculum Module 3: Priority Setting Lesson 2 - Interpretive Priority Setting Processes.
OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODS l How are Research Methods Important? How are Research Methods Important? l What is Descriptive Research? What is Descriptive.
New Hampshire Enhanced Assessment Initiative: Technical Documentation for Alternate Assessments Consequential Validity Inclusive Assessment Seminar Elizabeth.
OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODS
Decision Making Reviewing and Selecting Solutions.
Budget Development Timeline (subject to change) Budget Process Kickoff  October 26. VP’s and deans determine how budget discussions will occur in their.
Health and Safety Executive Health and Safety Executive Improving the efficiency of the regulatory process Rob Mason Head of Regulatory Policy Chemicals.
Conducting the IT Audit
CONCEPT PAPER RESULT BASED PLANNING. RESULT-ORIENTED PLANNING Overall Objective/ Goal Specific Objective/ Purposes Expected Result/ Output Activities.
The Adaptation Policy Framework Bill Dougherty Stockholm Environment Institute – Boston Center Manila April 2004 An overview of the new UNDP-GEF product.
Evaluation methods and tools (Focus on delivery mechanism) Jela Tvrdonova, 2014.
Expert Consultation on Costing HIV Responses in Asia - Pacific October 2010 Recap of Day 1.
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
O F F I C E O F T H E Auditor General of British Columbia 1 OAG Review of the Performance Agreements between MoHS and Health Authorities.
ADD Perspectives on Accountability Where are We Now and What does the Future Hold? Jennifer G. Johnson, Ed.D.
13 January 2011 Country Launch – 2011 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration Role of Donors.
Ch. 2: Planning a Study (cont’d) pp THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL  In all empirical research studies, you systematically collect and analyze data 
1 Draft Guidelines for Health Expenditure and Financing in OECD Health Data th Meeting of Health Accounts Experts and Correspondents for Health Expenditure.
1 Designing Effective Programs: –Introduction to Program Design Steps –Organizational Strategic Planning –Approaches and Models –Evaluation, scheduling,
PPA 502 – Program Evaluation Lecture 2c – Process Evaluation.
DAC OECD Workshop on Evaluating conflict prevention and peace-building activities Oslo, 17 February 2011 Evaluation of overall European Commission support.
Module 5 - Questions and Criteria for Evaluations.
CAUSAL INFERENCE Presented by: Dan Dowhower Alysia Cohen H 615 Friday, October 4, 2013.
CLOE Conference, Tartu, 24 April 2007 Cluster Linked over the Baltic Sea Region – the BSR InnoNet Project CLOE Conference – Regional Innovation Strategies.
The Research Excellence Framework Expert Advisory Groups round 1 meetings February 2009 Paul Hubbard Head of Research Policy.
Presented by CIDA on behalf of the Task Team on Multilateral Effectiveness.
| 1 › Matthias Galster, University of Groningen, NL › Armin Eberlein, American University of Sharjah, UAE Facilitating Software Architecting by.
European Commission Joint Evaluation Unit common to EuropeAid, Relex and Development Methodology for Evaluation of Budget support operations at Country.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNECE Transport Division 1 TRANS-EUROPEAN RAILWAY (TER) PROJECT 2 nd Expert Group Meeting (Budapest, 23 September.
NSDS DESIGN PROCESS: ROAD MAPS & OTHER PRELIMINARIES Prof. Ben Kiregyera NSDS Workshop, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 9 August 2005.
INTOSAI's Capacity Building Committee Annual Meeting High-level Update on the ‎INTOSAI's Strategic Planning Process By: H.E Mr. Osama Faquih Stockholm.
Statistics for Transparency, Accountability, and Results: The Busan Action Plan for Statistics PARIS21 & The World BankMeeting on the Busan Action Plan.
Humanitarian Architecture Review Is the current coordination structure relevant and effective to ensure humanitarian needs are being met in a timely and.
Core Principles and Action Plan February 4, 2004.
Fourth IABIN Council Meeting Support to Building the Inter-American Biodiversity Information Network.
Quality Assessment of MFA’s evaluations Rita Tesselaar Policy and operations Evaluation Department Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
FIJI PERSPECTIVE. Donor programs well aligned to strategic priorities of Government However, the lack of a proper framework to guide the Government- Donor.
Joint Evaluation of the Paris Declaration, Phase 2Core Team Joint Evaluation of the Paris Declaration, Phase 2 Evaluation Framework & Workplan Presentation.
Developing a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework: Insight into internal stakeholder learnings Beth Ferguson AES Conference Sydney 2 September 2011.
Report of the 6 th GEOSS Evaluation Presentation to GEO-XII 11 November 2015 John Adamec Co-Chair GEO Monitoring & Evaluation Working Group.
UNGEI – GPE Partnership Questions for UNGEI GAC. UNGEI Resources What resources might be required at the global or country level to carry out the proposed.
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
Rome Donors Meeting September 7th1 Consultation of AMC concept with key stakeholders Rome Donors Meeting September 7 th, 2006.
Evaluating Engagement Judging the outcome above the noise of squeaky wheels Heather Shaw, Department of Sustainability & Environment Jessica Dart, Clear.
EuropeAid 1 Update on development of the PPCM Guidance.
Bangladesh Joint Country Assistance Evaluation: Assessing Total ODA at the Country Level Presentation to OECD DAC November 2006 Bruce Murray Director General.
Chapter Two Copyright © 2006 McGraw-Hill/Irwin The Marketing Research Process.
Project Proposal Doucument Project Title 2015 APEC e-Learning Training Program Name of Presenter Date, 2015.
THE PARIS DECLARATION and DAC EVALUATION QUALITY STANDARDS Task Team on New Context for Development Evaluation DAC EQS Workshop, Auckland, 10 February.
Evaluation What is evaluation?
LID Guidance and Training for Southern California
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
Assessment of Quality in Statistics GLOBAL ASSESSMENTS, PEER REVIEWS AND SECTOR REVIEWS IN THE ENLARGEMENT AND ENP COUNTRIES Mirela Kadic, Project Manager.
Rail transport developments Agenda point 7.2
Seven Utilization Lessons
Proposed Approach to Strengthening Information on Development Effectiveness of Multilateral Organizations Presented by: Goberdhan Singh for the Task Team.
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation Total ODA Impact Stefan Molund, SIDA Fourth meeting of the DAC Network on Development Evaluation, Paris, 30 – 31 March 2006

Executive summary The proposal ripe for go/no go decision The proposal ripe for go/no go decision Main alternatives: Main alternatives: 1.Introduce the proposal to interested partner countries 2.Put it aside for the time being Remaining questions about design and process best discussed with partner countries Remaining questions about design and process best discussed with partner countries

Consultation process Presentation of original proposal. Paris, November 2004 Presentation of original proposal. Paris, November 2004 Assessment of technical feasibility by team of development economists (Bigsten, Gunning, Tarp) Assessment of technical feasibility by team of development economists (Bigsten, Gunning, Tarp) Multidisciplinary seminar on evaluation of total ODA and alternative approaches to macro-evaluation. Stockholm, November 2005 Multidisciplinary seminar on evaluation of total ODA and alternative approaches to macro-evaluation. Stockholm, November 2005 Assessment of proposals by enlarged evaluation task force. Edinburgh, February, 2006 Assessment of proposals by enlarged evaluation task force. Edinburgh, February, 2006

Original proposal Focus on development impact Focus on development impact Broad coverage Broad coverage Long-term perspective Long-term perspective Concern with change mechanisms Concern with change mechanisms Country development starting point: tracing links from impacts backward to inputs rather than the other way around (as in most evaluations). Country development starting point: tracing links from impacts backward to inputs rather than the other way around (as in most evaluations). Focus on combined donor support (the distinctive feature of a total ODA evaluation) Focus on combined donor support (the distinctive feature of a total ODA evaluation) Impacts assessed in partner country perspective. Impacts assessed in partner country perspective.

Original proposal (contd.) Joint donor-partner country evaluation with partner country actively involved Joint donor-partner country evaluation with partner country actively involved Independent evaluation team Independent evaluation team Multidisciplinary evaluation team well grounded in country context Multidisciplinary evaluation team well grounded in country context

Key conclusions from consultations Original proposal too broad in scope Original proposal too broad in scope Evaluation technically feasible provided that statistical ‘gold standards’ for causal analysis are replaced by more realistic standards of process tracing, ‘plausible association’, inference to best explanation, etc. Assessing total ODA impact very different from assessing project impact on restricted target group by experimental or quasi-experimental methods. Eclectic multidisciplinary approach required. Evaluation technically feasible provided that statistical ‘gold standards’ for causal analysis are replaced by more realistic standards of process tracing, ‘plausible association’, inference to best explanation, etc. Assessing total ODA impact very different from assessing project impact on restricted target group by experimental or quasi-experimental methods. Eclectic multidisciplinary approach required.

Key conclusions from consultations (contd.) Partner country development strategies not suitable as primary evaluation criteria. Generally accepted measures of development more appropriate. (However, assessing usefulness of total ODA to partner country development efforts would still be very relevant.) Partner country development strategies not suitable as primary evaluation criteria. Generally accepted measures of development more appropriate. (However, assessing usefulness of total ODA to partner country development efforts would still be very relevant.) Inviting partner countries to join the evaluation is the logical next step. Inviting partner countries to join the evaluation is the logical next step.

Revised evaluation design Focus on development impact Focus on development impact Focus on impact on restricted set of development variables (New) Focus on impact on restricted set of development variables (New) Long-term perspective Long-term perspective Focus on change mechanisms Focus on change mechanisms Country development starting point Country development starting point Focus on combined donor support Focus on combined donor support Impacts assessed against generally accepted welfare criteria. (New) Impacts assessed against generally accepted welfare criteria. (New) The process requirements are the same as before. The revised proposal would serve as a framework for open discussions between the partners.