Transcript Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network

The Multilateral Organisation
Performance Assessment Network
Björn Gillsäter• Head of Secretariat
Bilateral
assessments of
multilaterals
(e.g. DfID MAR)
High Level Panels /
External Reviewers
e.g. CGD &
Brookings
MOPAN
Reporting via agency
Management
Self-evaluation
(COMPAS)
Results monitoring
Internal
Evaluation
Units
MULTILATERAL
EFFECTIVENESS:
Approaches to
Assessments
Self-evaluation of the
results and evaluation
systems
UNEG & ECG
Harmonisation,
joint studies
2
Independent
Evaluation Groups
(e.g. / IEG)
EVALNET
Guidance for
meta-evaluation
of development
effectiveness
Evaluations by
individual
donors, e.g. IOB,
France
DAC Peer
Reviews
“Comprehensive
evaluations”
Type 1:
regular on
replacement
e.g. GEF
UNEG / DAC
Evalnet
Peer reviews of
evaluation
functions
Type 2:
crisis, political
demand
e.g. FAO
Joint inspection
Unit of the UN
Members provide
of USD 60 bn/year
to multilateral organisations
3
Bilateral
assessments of
multilaterals
(e.g. DfID MAR)
High Level Panels /
External Reviewers
e.g. CGD &
Brookings
MOPAN
Reporting via agency
Management
Self-evaluation
(COMPAS)
Results monitoring
Internal
Evaluation
Units
MULTILATERAL
EFFECTIVENESS:
Approaches to
Assessments
Self-evaluation of the
results and evaluation
systems
UNEG & ECG
Harmonisation,
joint studies
4
Independent
Evaluation Groups
(e.g. / IEG)
EVALNET
Guidance for
meta-evaluation
of development
effectiveness
Evaluations by
individual
donors, e.g. IOB,
France
DAC Peer
Reviews
“Comprehensive
evaluations”
Type 1:
regular on
replacement
e.g. GEF
UNEG / DAC
Evalnet
Peer reviews of
evaluation
functions
Type 2:
crisis, political
demand
e.g. FAO
Joint inspection
Unit of the UN
Does MOPAN make a
difference?
5
Evidence from members
Almost all MOPAN members use the assessments both :
• As background material for their discussions with multilateral
organisations, and
• as a source of input for strategic decision-making about their ways
of working with the organisations (funding etc.).
/2015 survey of MOPAN members
When making decisions about funding allocations to multilateral
organisations:
• 3 members perceive findings as “very important”
• 10 MOPAN members perceive findings as “important or moderately
important”
/2013 DAC survey on multilateral allocations
6
UN Women welcomes the final assessment report, the
first ever for the Entity, which presents a
comprehensive, robust and evidence based review of
the first three years of our work.
– Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, Under-Secretary-General and Executive
Director, UN Women. Management response to 2014 report
We [UNFPA] sincerely appreciate the effort made
by the 19 donor Governments to unify one joint
assessment instrument…
– Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin,
Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director, UNFPA.
Management response to 2014 report
7
2015 onwards: MOPAN 3.0
A More Ambitious Network
8
Reshaping MOPAN’s assessment approach
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
9
Assess more organisations (12-14 per assessment cycle)
Collect data from more countries (10-16)
Conduct assessments over a 2-year period (2015-2016)
Widen the range of organisations assessed
Increase focus on development effectives and results, while still
also assessing organisational effectiveness
Sharpen focus on country-level performance
Simplify rating scheme
Use criteria derived from the DAC EvalNet’s approach to assess
the development effectiveness
Organisations to assess in 2015-2016
African Development Bank
Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI)
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM)
CGIAR Fund
ILO
UNAIDS
UNDP
UNEP
UN Habitat
UNICEF
UN OCHA
World Bank
10
Thank you.
The Multilateral Organisation
Performance Assessment Network
www.mopanonline.org
11