London Conference on Afghanistan 31 January

1
London Conference on Afghanistan31 January 1
February 2006 ARTF donors meetingPerformance
Assessment MatrixWhere does the money go and
does it work?
2
Origins and background

• April 2005 evaluation need for policy dialogue
• November 2005 ARTF donors meeting agreement to
  broad approach
• Dec-Jan DFID and World Bank develop detailed
  approach
• Objectives for today i) endorsement of detailed
  approach, ii) ideas on how it should work, iii)
  agreement to process for drawing up PAM and
  starting policy dialogue

3
Why is this important?

• Support GoAs aid effectiveness agenda
• Opportunity to address donor concerns about
  on-budget funding
• Political reality for some donors showing impact
  to justify funding
• Improve predictability of donor funding
• Preparation for future pooled budget funding?
• Why dont donors put more aid through the GoA
  budget, and what can GoA do to address some of
  those concerns over time?

4
How will it work?

• Matrix of agreed GoA objectives which ARTF
  funding contributes to, with specific indicators
• Twice yearly review of performance against
  indicators, in line with GoA budget cycle
• Formal discussions between GoA and all ARTF
  donors on performance, relevant policies,
  available ARTF funding and allocations
• Interim discussion through MoF donor coordination
  sub-committee
• PAM a living document annual update?

5
What should be assessed?

• What areas?
• PFM/PAR
• Sectoral progress
• Donor coordination/harmonisation
• What kind of benchmarks?
• Benchmarks which ARTF funding contributes to
• Initially mostly inputs/policy actions
• Moving towards outputs and outcomes
• Where from?
• Benchmarks agreed elsewhere ANDS, SMP etc

6
Who should do it?

• MoF as GoA focal point
• (in liaison with I-ANDS Secretariat)
• Annually rotating donor focal point
• World Bank as administrator of the process
• All ARTF donors involved in dialogue

7
How should donors respond?

• If all benchmarks on track increase funding!
• If not no automatic interruption of funds, but
• dialogue around options
• - increase in proportion of preferenced
• - adjustments in investment portfolio
• - decisions about longer-term funding
• - interruption an option in extreme cases

8
International lessons

• Make it clear to governments (and Parliaments)
  the connection between progress and funding
• Need trust and an open dialogue
• Mechanistic variable tranching unproven
• Keep benchmarks to a relevant minimum
• Align timings with budget cycle
• Donor commitments need monitoring too

9
Next steps

• World Bank, MoF and donor focal point (to be
  chosen) draw up draft PAM
• Circulate PAM for comment, and finalise
• First review meeting in July (or at ADF?)

10
Priority areas for discussion

• Donors/GoA objectives/expectations?
• Scope of PAM
• Process/timings
• Roles
• Objectives for today
• i) endorsement of detailed approach
• ii) ideas on how it should work
• iii) agreement to process for drawing up PAM and
  starting policy dialogue