Transcript Proposed Approach to Strengthening Information on Development Effectiveness of Multilateral Organizations Presented by: Goberdhan Singh for the Task Team on Multilateral Effectiveness Presented to: The DAC.

Proposed Approach to
Strengthening Information on
Development Effectiveness of
Multilateral Organizations
Presented by:
Goberdhan Singh for the Task Team on Multilateral Effectiveness
Presented to: The DAC Network on Development Effectiveness
February 2010
Background and Developments



CIDA paper arguing for a new approach to
augmenting performance information on Multilateral
Organizations (MOs) presented to the to the DAC
Network on Development Evaluation in June 2009.
Network established a Task Team to clarify and
explore issues including rationale for a new approach
and interconnections with existing initiatives (MOPAN
and DAC/UNEG Evaluation Peer Reviews).
Task Team Meeting of October 15/16 2009
established Management Group and called for
development of proposal for submission to Network
Meeting of February 2010.
2
The Work of the Task Team

The Task Team:
– Discussed the need for information on MO
performance, especially re Development
Effectiveness (DE).
– Reviewed performance information available from
MOPAN, COMPAS, DAC/UNEG Peer Reviews.
– Developed a Draft Framework describing scenarios
for the availability of Development Effectiveness
information and identified options for augmenting
information where necessary.
– Established principles for pilot testing approaches to
augmenting available information.
– Established an informal Management Group including
CIDA, DFID, UNEG, SADEV, US-AID, and the World
Bank to support the work of the Task Team.
– Oversaw and reviewed the development of this
proposal.
3
Primary Rationale: The Need for
Information on Development
Effectiveness

Task Team identified diverse sources of information on
elements of Organizational Effectiveness including MO’s own
reporting systems and reports of MOPAN, DAC/UNEG
Evaluation Peer Reviews, COMPAS Etc.
 Agreed that the most significant information gap concerns
systematic, credible information on Development Effectiveness
of MOs at field level in partner countries.
 Agreed that any effort to address this gap must recognize the
roles of MO reporting systems and be complementary and
coordinated with the MOPAN and the DAC/UNEG Evaluation
Peer Review processes.
 Noted that decisions on supplementing available information
required development of a framework for reviewing available
information and selecting options for engagement with each MO.
4
Framework of MO Effectiveness Information Sources and Options
1.
Information Sources:
MO Effectiveness
2.
Scenarios Regarding Information on
Development Effectiveness
MO Reporting on Its Own
Organizational
Effectiveness
Scenario (A): MO Reporting on
Development Effectiveness Adequate
MOPAN
Scenario (B): MO Effectiveness
Reporting Insufficient but Evaluation
Function Adequate
COMPAS
DAC/UNEG Evaluation
Peer Review
MO and External
Evaluation Reports
MOPAN
COMPAS
DAC/UNEG Evaluation
Peer Review
MO and External
Evaluation Reports
Joint Evaluations
3.
Options: Development Effectiveness
Information
Option 1: Rely on MO Reporting Systems
(Medium to Longer Term Goal)
If MO reports on development
effectiveness rigorous, evidence-based
and of sufficient coverage and frequency,
especially if verified by evaluation data.
Implement Option 1.
If MOPAN and DAC/UNEG Evaluation
Peer Review indicate evaluation function
adequate and sufficient evaluation data
available, implement Option 2.
Option 2. Conduct a systematic synthesis of
information from available evaluations
as they relate to MO Development
Effectiveness.
Scenario (C) MO Effectiveness
Reporting and Available Evaluations
Inadequate for Reporting on
Development Effectiveness
If MOPAN and DAC/UNEG Evaluation
Peer Review indicate the evaluation
function is inadequate and/or sufficient
evaluation material is not available, then
implement elements of option 3.
Option 3: Implement actions aimed at
strengthening MO development
effectiveness reporting. Including (among
others):

Joint evaluation

Direct support of MO results reporting
systems and evaluation systems

Support MO efforts to strengthen
decentralized evaluation systems
5
Task Team Recommends

DAC Network endorse proposal.
 Task Team/Management Group be mandated by the DAC
Network to pilot the proposed approach with two to three
MOs selected from the MOPAN Survey for 2010 (with a
focus on Option 2, Synthesis of Evaluation Results).
 Pilot to have the characteristics and follow the schedule
indicated in the following two slides.
 Results of the Pilots to be reported to the first meeting of
the DAC Network on Development Evaluation for 2011.
6
Characteristics of the Proposal





While coordinated and complementary, the two processes
remain distinct.
For each pilot, two or more bilateral agencies to enter into
a burden sharing agreement for financial and direct
management responsibilities.
Management Group (MG) responsible for further
refinement of the design and for overall management of
the process with reporting to the Network through the
Task Team.
CIDA Evaluation willing to serve as chair of MG.
Engagement with MOs chosen for review to include
evaluation unit, secretariat and governing body.
Pilot Test Schedule







Approval by DAC Network on Development Evaluation –
Feb. 2010.
Identification of potential MOs and interested bilateral
agencies for collaboration on pilot tests – March 2010.
Design Phase for refinement of proposed synthesis
evaluation methodology including sampling, scoring
criteria, reporting formats etc. – April to June 2010.
Meeting of the Management Group on design of synthesis
evaluation methodologies – April 2010
Review Phase – May to November 2010
Meeting of Management Group to review results and
lessons learned – December 2010
Reporting to DAC Network on Development Evaluation –
Spring 2011