Transcript Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Danida EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PARIS DECLARATION ON AID EFFECTIVENESS Presentation prepared for DAC Network on Aid Evaluation Paris, 27

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Danida
EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE PARIS DECLARATION ON
AID EFFECTIVENESS
Presentation prepared for
DAC Network on Aid Evaluation
Paris, 27 June 2007
by
Niels Dabelstein
Key elements of the evaluation
• The commitments entered into by the signatories of the Paris
Declaration pose a very important challenge for the evaluation
community which needs to be addressed in a joint fashion.
• Four track approach suggested:
– Development of a common evaluation framework
– Country-led country level evaluations
– Donor –led HQ level evaluations evaluations
– A medium to long term programme of analytical
work.
• Intermediate results should feed into the High Level Forum on
Aid Effectiveness in 2008. Outcome evaluation should feed into
HLF 2010.
Steps taken until now
• June - October 2005: Preliminary consultations with the DAC
Network on Development Evaluation and the Working Party
on Aid Effectiveness and its Joint Venture on Monitoring of
the Paris Declaration (JV-MPD).
• November 2005 – March 2006 : An options paper and a
literature review was developed.
• March – June 2006: The DAC Network and the WP-EFF and
JV-MPD discussed the draft options paper and endorsed
steps to move forward.
• September – October 2006: Consultations at Sub-Saharan,
Latin American and Asian Workshop, on Aid Effectiveness
• March 2007 First meeting of the Reference Group for the
Evaluation discussed Framework ToR for the evaluation
• April – May 2007 Framework TOR and Generic TOR
approved
• June 2007 Inception Workshop in Copenhagen
A joint evaluation
• Partner countries and donors develop evaluation
framework jointly
• Country level evaluations led by partner countries
and managed in-country
• Partner countries participate in evaluation of
donors
• Joint Reference Group and overall management
Country-led country evaluations
Building directly on the joint monitoring activities
already undertaken and other knowledge readily
available asses changes in behaviour of all
partners.
To be designed within the common evaluation
framework to ensure comparability and aggregation
of findings, but with sufficient flexibility to allow for
country specificities and interests.
Each evaluation should be managed in-country, led
by the government, or an independent body,
supported by a reference group comprising
interested donors and other stakeholders.
Bangladesh ,Bolivia, Mali, Philippines, Senegal, South Africa,
Sri Lanka, Uganda, Viet Nam, Zambia
Country level evaluations
• the utility of the Paris Declaration itself as a
tool for aid effectiveness;
• the change of donor behaviour in terms of
alignment of their systems and procedures to
implement the PD commitments;
• the change of partner behaviour, with
ownership as the key entry-point; and
• emerging results
Donor HQ level evaluations
Looking at the way in which the Paris Declaration is
finding expression in policies, strategies and
incentives across a sample of donor organisations.
To be designed within the common evaluation
framework to ensure comparability and aggregation
of findings, but with sufficient flexibility to allow for
country specificities and interests.
Each evaluation should be managed by the donor, or
an independent body, supported by a reference
group comprising relevant stakeholders including
partner countries.
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Luxemburg, Netherlands,
New Zealand, UK, UNDP, (Spain, Sweden)
Donor HQ level evaluations
• Level of leadership and commitment as
expressed in policies and strategies;
• Development of capacities as expressed in
guidelines, procedures, staff training,
resources and delegation of authority (to field
level);
• Conducive incentive systems: RBM,
HRD.and disincentives (transaction costs)
A medium to long term programme of
thematic Studies
Drawing together and critically evaluate findings from a
variety of sources with a bearing upon the common
framework.
This work to be coordinated with the work of the JV-MPD
and the Medium Term Monitoring Plan to avoid any risk
of duplication and to ensure value added.
•
Links between aid effectiveness and development
effectiveness
•
•
Technical Cooperation
•
•
(Fragile states)
•
(Civil society)
(Untying of aid)
(Cross Cutting Issues)
A Synthesis report
Drawing together findings and lessons from
the country and donor level evaluations as
well as the thematic studies.
To be presented to the 2008 HLF in Accra
Managing the evaluation
Reference Group:
•
Members of the DAC Network on Development Evaluation,
•
Partner country members of the WP-EFF/JV-MPD,
•
Multilaterals and CSOs
Co-chaired by Vietnam and Denmark
The Reference Group will:
•
•
Endorse the evaluation framework and selection of thematic
studies
Comment on Terms of Reference for component studies and on
the draft synthesis report
Reference Group
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Japan
The Netherlands
Norway
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
UNDP
World Bank
OECD/DAC
EURODAD
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bangladesh
Bolivia
Cambodia
Mali
Morocco
Nicaragua
Philippines
Senegal
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Uganda
Viet Nam
Zambia
Reality of Aid
AFREA
Managing the evaluation
Management Group:
Denmark, Netherlands, South Africa, UNDP, Vietnam,
Responsible for:
•Developing the overall evaluation framework and generic ToR
•Coordinating and managing the joint evaluation process
•Guiding the component studies,
•Developing and managing the thematic Studies and the synthesis
of findings and recommendations.
The Reference Group and Management Group is supported by a
small secretariat (Danida).
Funding the evaluation
Funding
The cost of developing of the evaluation framework,
the medium to long term programme of thematic
studies, the synthesis report as well as meetings,
workshops, reporting, dissemination etc. will be
financed from a central pool or trust fund (app. $ 2
Mil).
The cost of country (max $ 180.000) and donor (max
$ 100.000) evaluations should be borne by the
donors and partner countries involved. All country
studies are now supported be one or two donors:
Timetable
2007
Jan – Mar
Mar – Apr
Apr - May
June - Aug
Sept – Nov
Nov – Dec
Agree Evaluation
Framework
Develop specific
terms of reference
for country level
and donor
evaluations.
Develop
programme
of thematic
studies
Contract evaluators
Country and Donor
evaluations
Preliminary Synthesis
of C and D
evaluations
2008
Jan
Jan – Apr
September
Aug – Sep
Nov –
Workshop on
initial findings
Synthesis of
component
evaluations and
other material
3rd High Level
Forum in Accra
Develop follow up
study programme
2008 – 2010
Follow up
summative
studies – to be
decided
Partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bangladesh
Bolivia
Mali
Philippines
Senegal
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Uganda
Viet Nam
Zambia
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Japan
Spain
Belgium
Japan
Canada
US
UNDP
Austria
Denmark & UK
Netherlands and Ireland