1. THE SOUTH AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP AGENCY (SADPA) SADPA M&E IDEAS: PRESENTATION AT THE GLOBAL DIALOGUE OF DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES AND MINISTRIES LIMA, PERU, 11-12 APRIL 2013 Shoayb CASOO

2. SADPA: LEGISLATIVE DEMANDS Legislation – Framework for Managing Programme Performance Information – South African Statistics Quality Assurance Framework – Public Finance Management Act Structures – Ministry for Performance Monitoring – within the Presidency – National Treasury – Auditor General – SA Public Service Commission – Parliamentary Oversight Within Institutions – Institutional Arrangements Director-General/SADPA Head – Accounting Officer Internal Audit Reporting Requirements Institutional Arrangements for Risk Mitigation – DC M&E Obligations Prog Risk Management Reporting Obligations Methodology for M&E

3. SADPA QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS DONOR CITIZENS RECIPIENT POPULATION DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES ACCOUNTABILITY TRANSPARENCY MEET OUR NEEDS QUALITY DRIVEN APPROACH SADPA STRATEGY STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES SUPPORTING FRAMEWORKS

4. SADPA PROGRAMME LIFE-CYCLE QUALITY ASSURANCE PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION MONITORING AND EVALUATION RESULTS BASED MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS PROCESS

5. SA/SADPA DEVELOPING PARTNER FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT - DESIRED OUTCOMES PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT CSP’S, Business Case, PIP PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT Funding Model, PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT APPOINTMENT OF SERVICE PROVIDER SA Partner Dept (MOU) External Service Provider (SLA) RESULTS AND VERIFICATION DISBURSEMENTS BASED ON MILESTONES AS PER PIP T&Cs IMPLEMENTATION SADPA PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE, MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORTING OBLIGATIONS

6. LINKING PAYMENTS TO PERFORMANCE Move away from upfront payments to disbursements linked to milestones i.e. performance INPUTSOUTPUTOUTCOME DISBURSE 100% FUNDS PROJECT APPROVAL DISBURSE 100% FUNDS PROJECT COMPLETED T Traditional approach e.g. ARF Payment by performance Multi-year budget plan Payment based on PIP and pre-agreed results and parameters Recipient drives implementation and contracts service providers Results verification as trigger for disbursements

7. PROCEDURE MICRO- GRANTS TECH SUPPORT GRANTS OTHER SUPPORT PRE- PROGRAMMI NG AND PROGRAMMI NG Less thanMore thanMORE THAN POLITICAL DIALOGUE Not Mandatory Embassy and Partner country Mandatory FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT Not Mandatory Exchange of Note Not Mandatory Exchange of Note Not Mandatory Exchange of Note Mandatory PARTNERSHIP / PROJECT AGREEMENT Mandatory QUALITY ASSURING THE DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION PROCESS

8. APPROVAL BY DG DIRCO AND SADPA:HEAD Required N/A APPRAISAL BY TAC Not required Required APPROVAL BY MINISTER Not Required CONCEPT NOTERequired BUSINESS CASE Small project format PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATIO N PLAN (PIP) Mandatory PROGRESS REPORT (SIX MONTHLY OR MILESTONE REPORT) Mandatory if project more than 6 months Mandatory PROJECT CLOSE-OUT REPORT Mandatory CONSULTATION/ TECHNICAL ADVICE FROM SADPA As Needed Advised/ Mandatory Mandatory

9. ISSUES FOR RELFECTION Will it make a difference: What’s the use of evaluating a programme/project if it is the wrong one? If partner country must drive implementation and determine areas of focus….who must drive the Evaluation? What types of programmes are best suited to traditional approaches compared to managing for Development Results (MfDR) How do we ensure M&E in countries with weak legislation, no political champions and no institutional systems for good governance? – Whose cheese is it anyway…donor…recipient…rec gov..? Is there a universal fit for M&E?