1 / 16

Monitoring Outcomes – Agency Results

Monitoring Outcomes – Agency Results. What should agencies be accountable for? Who should we be accountable to? What are the challenges?. HEALTH WARNING. WORK IN PROGRESS. What is assessed?. Accountability. Development Effectiveness. Development Outcomes.

kaethe
Download Presentation

Monitoring Outcomes – Agency Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Monitoring Outcomes – Agency Results What should agencies be accountable for? Who should we be accountable to? What are the challenges?

  2. HEALTH WARNING WORK IN PROGRESS

  3. What is assessed? Accountability Development Effectiveness Development Outcomes All Governments, International Agencies and civil society organisations Intermediate Outcomes DFID and its partners Organisational Effectiveness Outputs/deliverables and Processes DFID Inputs What should we be accountable for?

  4. Accountable for: Outputs, deliverables, and inputs Requires: Effective policies, processes and activities Accountable to: UK Parliament UK citizens Accountable through: Public Service Agreement, Service Delivery Agreement Organisational Effectiveness

  5. Development Effectiveness • Monterrey consensus – Development Outcomes delivered in-country. • Donors cannot directly deliver they CONTRIBUTE

  6. Accountable for: Outputs, deliverables, and inputs Requires: Effective policies, processes and activities Assessment tools: Service Delivery Agreement Evaluations Financial Reports Management Reports Information Systems Portfolio Management Systems Measuring Organisational Effectiveness

  7. Accountable for: Aid Volume Policy Coherence Trade, debt etc Aid Effectiveness Untying, aid allocation, harmonisation, alignment. Assessment processes: DAC reports on ODA/GNI, untying etc. DAC AEWP monitoring Rome Harmonisation Forum follow up WTO, UNCTAD, WB Peer reviews – e.g. DAC, SPA, NEPAD Measuring Development Effectiveness – Monterrey Commitments

  8. Measuring Development Effectiveness – CONTRIBUTION TO OUTCOMES • DFID’S APPROACH • Public Service Agreement • Time bound: 2003-2006 • Interim outcomes directly linked to MDGs • Proxy indicators – • don’t try to measure everything everywhere • Indicators based on partners’ plans in key countries, aggregated to provide regional targets.

  9. Measuring Development Effectiveness – CONTRIBUTION TO OUTCOMES • Service Delivery Agreement • Time bound: 2003-2006 • Sets targets for what DFID will do to contribute to PSA outcomes • Proxy indicators – • don’t try to measure everything everywhere • Targets mixture of intermediate outputs; activities and processes. More within DFID’s control to deliver

  10. Measuring Development Effectiveness – CONTRIBUTION TO OUTCOMES • Directors’ Delivery Plans • Time bound: 2003-2006 • Describe logic model liking SDA targets to PSA outcomes • Integral risk assessment and risk management strategy • Provide bridge between development effectiveness and organisational effectiveness setting out policies, processes and inputs required to deliver outcomes.

  11. Public Service Agreement 2003-06 • PSA Target 1: Progress towards MDGs in 16 key countries in Africa • Proxy indicators include poverty reduction; primary enrolment; under-5 mortality; maternal mortality; • SDA deliverables: Increased DFID support to such areas as: • Development of education programmes, health programmes, economic and political governance; climate for foreign investment.

  12. WB CAS DFID PRSP UNDAF USAID

  13. Business Plan PRSP WB DFID UN US

  14. How PDP objectives feed into PSA objectives MDGs 2015 T I M E L I N E 2015 White Papers I and II PSA 3 years SDA 3 years Directors’ Delivery Plans 3 years Delivery Plan Reviews Annual CAPs Updated annually Team Objectives Updated at least annually Individual PDP Objectives Annual with 6 monthly review

  15. CHALLENGES IN DFID APPROACH • Aggregation of over ambitious country targets leads to very stretching PSA targets. • Lack of reliable, timely data • Quality assuring logical mapping • Managing “For” not “By” results

  16. CHALLENGES for all of us • To move from individual agency plans/strategies to shared donor business plan supporting Poverty Strategies. • Developing a common performance assessment framework to track progress in implementing Poverty strategies across countries whilst respecting individual country choice and ownership. • Ensuring national ownership and broad stakeholder involvement in the Poverty strategy monitoring process • Supporting partner governments to improve the quality of the indicators in the PRSP, and the effectiveness of their national monitoring systems

More Related