Institutionalizing IE in the MCC Franck Wiebe Chief Economist, MCC April 2, 2009

 MCC was created 5 years ago and modeled on generally accepted “best practices” in aid  Growth matters for poverty alleviation  Policies matter …  Country ownership matters …  Results matter …  MCC has a public-private Board of Directors:  Chaired by Secretary of State  Includes four from private/nonprofit sector  Staff of  MCC has signed 18 country programs (more than $6 billion) and about 20 Threshold Programs MCC Background Information

MCC’s Framework for Results (available online at  Cost-Benefit Analysis  Pre-decision estimate of expected impact  Monetary benefits makes possible comparison across sectors  90% of funded activities in first 16 have formal quantitative model  Monitoring and Evaluation  Baseline surveys  Implementation performance against expectations, during and after  Independent completion review of every program, every activity  Rigorous Impact Evaluations (with formal counterfactual)  Strategy based on feasibility, need, and learning potential  Designed and contracted before implementation begins  International IE expertise, local collaboration → capacity building  47% of activities, 58% of funds under independent IE

Critical Institutional Elements  IE decisions structured to be made early  Always before implementation  Sometimes even as part of the funding decision  IE managed separate from implementation  Central budget allows for priority setting  Annual budget line item provides flexibility  Public commitment to full transparency  Explanation of decisions  Documentation of plans, progress  Full disclosure of results, data