1 Evaluation Utilization: the case of the Paris Evaluation (Phase 1) and its use in the Accra HLF3 process Paris Evaluation Phase 2 Planning Meeting, Feb 2009

2 Contributed to all aspects of the 3rd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: Preparatory process – studies engaged wide range of players on implications of Paris commitments, supporting and blocking factors At the event, briefings to the 9 Roundtables, and major inputs to –Aid effectiveness in situations of fragility and conflict (thematic study) –Managing for development results Negotiation process and content of the AAA.

3 Specific contributions - Evidence Holding up the mirror (accountability) –on the gaps between Paris commitment and actual changes in policies, systems and behaviours – particularly the donor case studies Polishing the mirror (broadening and deepening the evidence base): –Validating self-assessments and monitoring processes –Highlighting aspects not well-covered by the Monitoring Survey –Deepening understanding of reasons behind weak & variable implementation as reflected in performance monitoring –Highlighting possibilities and priorities for action through multiple and diverse studies - donor, country and thematic

4 Specific Contributions: Voice Amplifier –perspectives of developing countries on aid effectiveness, particularly through the country case studies –use of emerging evidence in Regional Consultations, & by PCCG in negotiation process Challenger – e.g. –PD doesn’t apply to aid delivered in fragile and conflict situations –over-focus on indicators –underlined critical importance of less well monitored indicators – ownership, conditionality, medium term predictability, mutual accountability

5 Specific contributions – Influence policy change Informed AAA negotiation process, by highlighting –Paris not just a technical agenda of aid management, but about broader reform of international relationships in a rapidly changing context –Political leadership urgently needed to rapidly deliver aid reform if the PD to remain relevant And AAA content focus, e.g –Country leadership of aid management, country-led evaluation of policy –Alignment, from evidence on disparity between reform & use of country systems –Accountability: joint assessments, disclosure, facilitate parliamentary scrutiny, independent evidence –Relevance to diverse contexts –Relevance to all types of aid inc global funds, cso’s

6 Some limitations to use … (that Phase 2 will address? ) Expectations from political/senior levels that Phase 1 would ‘give the answers’ on development impact of PD… Phase 2 key focus (and key challenge) Timing …ensure findings well in advance of start of HLF4 negotiations Comprehensiveness & limited comparability across countries, contexts and modalities … key aspects of Phase 2 design?