2. 1 1 “R & R”

3. Meaning… R esults and R isks management at CIDA

4. 3 3

5. 4 4

6. 5 5

7. 6 6 Risk matrix Likelihood HighMediumLow Medium High Program / Sector: __________________ Impact

8. 7 7 Impact = high Likelihood = medium

9. 8 8 Risk mitigation to achieve good results…

10. CIDA RBM @ 2008 Why? What? How?

11. 10 WHY: International Context The last 10 years have seen the growth of a consensus and commitment to performance in development 2000 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2002 Monterrey Conference on Financing for Development 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness Managing for Development Results (MfDR) Joint Venture at the OECD/DAC provides a world forum to share lessons and advocate

12. 11 WHY: Canadian Context Simultaneously, recent Canadian governments have responded to increased public pressure for government accountability and performance through new standards for stronger accountability and reporting obligations. 2000 Results for Canadians: A Management Framework for the Government of Canada 2005 Management Resources and Results Structure (MRRS) 2006 Federal Accountability Act (FAA) 2008 Bill C293: Official Development Assistance Accountability Act

13. 12 WHY: CIDA context The good news: RBM has been used in CIDA for 30 years in various forms Lots of RBM info at project level, clearer PAA context Staff understand need for monitoring/reporting results CIDA still considered a model by peers for its RBM toolkit (guides, training materials) The bad news: RBM application became overly individualized Project info is fragmented, program-level info is fuzzy Staff are demanding simpler monitoring/reporting formats RBM definitions have not been updated, creating confusion, misalignment with GoC and international standards

14. 13 Therefore: RBM policy update needed to make performance management more (a) rigorous, (b) modern and (c) pragmatic: Standardize and provide better coherence in RBM terms, definitions and methodology used in across the agency, Align RBM at CIDA with Canadian Government approach, and Harmonize RBM at CIDA with the International Donor Community

15. 14 What does this mean? Common sense in 1996 is still common sense in 2008 The 2008 policy is an update, not a revolution. The essence of the original policy remains valid. Some definitions have been changed and the basic logic model/results chain has been amended.

16. 15 WHAT: Documents Currently Approved*  “ CIDA’s 2008 RBM Policy Statement”  Presentation of The Amended Key Results-Based Management Terms and Definitions”: a companion document providing the rationale for decisions made to amend the current key RBM terms, definitions and methodology, and presenting amended terms used to develop a results chain. * On EntreNous but also on external CIDA website

17. 16 HOW: Phased implementation  Further outreach (via Agency-wide Performance Network, briefings at Field Rep mtgs, BMGs)  Workshops with sector specialists to develop sector/theme- specific tools  Updated RBM guides and tools for CIDA Staff  Updated training for CIDA staff  Engagement with partners (briefings, access to updated training materials, guides and tools tailored to them)  Simultaneously, audit and evaluation functions are being strengthened, which will reinforce RBM.

18. 17 How is it different? Results Chain (Logic Model) 1996 2008

19. 18 HOW does it look in practice? Results Chain Examples

20. 19 Results Chain /Logic Model

21. 20 Conclusion: It’s about maintaining a judicious balance between R igour and R ealism