Delegation constituted in La Paz - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 18
About This Presentation
Title:

Delegation constituted in La Paz

Description:

THE LEAD OF THE EVALUATION. THE CONSISTENCY, HARMONISATION AND DISSEMINATION ISSUES ... EVALUATION LEAD. Who will take the lead for managing the evaluation? ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:59
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: aid101
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Delegation constituted in La Paz


1
European CommissionJoint Evaluation Unit common
to EuropeAid, Relex and Development
Methodology for Evaluation of Budget support
operations at Country levelConceptual and
Methodological Note
2
  • CURRENT SITUATION

EXISTING BUDGET SUPPORT EVALUATIONS 2004
Tanzania 2006 Joint Evaluation of 7 countries
from 1994 to 2004 budget support 2007
Ghana
  • CRITICISM

  • Evaluations addressing mainly THE PROCESS
  • And not enough the CHAIN OF RESULTS
  • IMPACTS AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL
  • IMPACTS ON SECTOR POLICIES

3
  • Expected Outputs of
  • the Budget Support Evaluation
  • An inventory of the inputs provided through
    budget support during a given period.
  • An assessment of the performance of these inputs
    in terms of direct outputs and induced outputs.
  • An identification of the changes which have
    occurred during the period in the partner country
    and the key causal factors driving those changes
    related to the budget support.
  • An assessment of the extent to which budget
    support may have contributed to the results
    identified at the outcome and impact levels.
  • An assessment of the overall relevance of budget
    support arrangements in the light of the evolving
    country and sector specific context, the aid
    policy and the related goals.

4
  • Comprehensive Evaluation Methodology
  • A Three components approach methodology combining
  • An evaluation of the budget support itself
  • An assessment of the budget support related
    outcomes and impacts of the government strategy
  • An exploration of the linkages between the
    budget support process and some outcomes and
    impacts of the government strategy
  • Focused on the main topics of the budget support
  • Each topic is associated with one or several
    Evaluation Questions, Judgement Criteria and
    Indicators
  • To ensure harmonisation of the evaluations in
    various contexts

5
GBS/SBS COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
6
  • FIRST COMPONENT

EVALUATION OF THE BUDGET SUPPORT
Overview of the national context and its evolution
Entry conditions for budget support
Volume of funds, policy dialogue and
conditionalities, technical assistance and
capacity building, harmonisation and alignment
Assessment of the inputs provided by the budget
support
Assessment of the direct outputs of the budget
support
Effects of the identified inputs including
effects on transaction costs
Assessment of the induced outputs and the
corresponding government actions

Changes that budget support has induced in
comparison to what was expected
7
  • SECOND COMPONENT

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS AND OUTCOMES
Government
  • Economic growth
  • Incidence of income and non income poverty
  • Degree of empowerment and social inclusion
  • Evolution of MDG indicators
  • Achieving sector development objectives for SBS

Review of the impacts of the government
strategy specifically those related to the
budget support deliverables
e.g.
8
  • SECOND COMPONENT

Causal factors
  • Changes in business confidence and
    competitiveness
  • Changes in the use and appreciation by the
    beneficiaries of goods and services provided by
    the public sector
  • Changes in the degree of confidence of the
    general public sector

Identification of the factors that have
contributed to the key changes
e.g.
Identification of the factors external to the
government strategy which could have had an
impact on the mentioned changes
  • Regional and international economic
  • Political environment
  • Other unforeseen event

e.g.
9
  • SECOND COMPONENT

Relationship
  • Positive linkages between government actions and
    improved outcomes
  • and
  • Failure or inappropriate actions which can have
    jeopardised the quality of the outcome

Identification of the outputs of the government
strategy which appear to have been of greatest
importance in generating change at outcomes level
10
  • THIRD COMPONENT

ASSESSMENT OF THE INFLUENCE OF BUDGET
SUPPORT  INTEGRATION AND CONSISTENCIES BETWEEN
COMPONENTS 1 2 
  • Comparison of the results of component 1 and
    component 2
  • Improved understanding of the influence of
    budget support on the institutional and policy
    changes
  • Increased consideration of the role of dominant
    factors in the determination of outcomes and
    impacts

If consistencies indicate causal links showing
positive conclusion for budget support
If no consistency find a possible explanation
11
GBS/SBS COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
Component 1
Component 3
Component 2
12
HOW TO MANAGE ANDIMPLEMENT THIS
EVALUATION?CHALLENGES AND PROPOSALS
  • We must take into account
  • THE STAKEHOLDERS
  • THE LEAD OF THE EVALUATION
  • THE CONSISTENCY, HARMONISATION AND DISSEMINATION
    ISSUES
  • THE IMPLEMENTATION
  • THE CAPACITY BUILDING ISSUE

13
STAKEHOLDERS
  • To whom this evaluation is for?
  • Are the donors the only stakeholders?
  • Proposal 1
  • All donors, the government and other main
    stakeholders involved in the budget support
    evaluated should be part of the evaluation.
  • The evaluation of budget support operation in a
    designed country should be part of a multi-donor
    evaluation programme.

14
EVALUATION LEAD
  • Who will take the lead for managing the
    evaluation?
  • From where will the evaluation be managed?
  • Proposal 2
  • One of the main donors in the country should be
    chosen by the other donors to take the lead and
    consequently for contracting with the evaluators.
    Special arrangements should be set up to involve
    representatives in the country.

15
CONSISTENCY, HARMONISATION AND DISSEMINATION
ISSUES
  • Proposal 3
  • To ensure consistency, the headquarter
    Evaluation Service of the lead donor should be
    responsible for the evaluation methodology and
    quality assurance. Each donor can have dedicated
    persons in his Evaluation Service to go into the
    countries where the evaluation takes place, at
    crucial moments.
  • Proposal 4
  • A network of donors should be set up to ensure
    harmonisation and dissemination.

16
IMPLEMENTATION
  • Who will do the evaluation?
  • Who has currently the competencies to evaluate
    budget support and how to manage it?
  • Proposal 5
  • A team of external independent consultants
    familiar with the main topics of the evaluation
    should be contracted for each evaluation.

17
CAPACITY BUILDING
  • Do we need a specific training on budget support
    evaluation?
  • Proposal 6
  • Make sure that few consultants are immediately
    operational and have been already trained in
    existing trainings
  • Proposal 7
  • Train the identified people within the
    Evaluation services of the Member States, some
    external independent consultants and the main
    governmental stakeholders of the recipient
    countries.

18
  • Where are we ?
  • Issue paper (May 2008)
  • Steering group at OCDE / DAC level (June 2008)
  • 1st meeting of a core group (September 2008)
  • DAC Evaluation Network (18 19 November 2008)
  • 2nd meeting of core group (December 2008)
  • Common methodological document and standard terms
    of reference (early 2009)
  • Testing methodological approach with partners
    agreement (2009)

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com