Monitoring and Evaluation of Public-Private Dialogues - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

Monitoring and Evaluation of Public-Private Dialogues

Description:

Title: Government-Business Consultative Mechanisms: Promising Practices and Possible Pitfalls Author: Jesse Biddle Last modified by: Anyone Created Date – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:87
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: Jesse195
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Monitoring and Evaluation of Public-Private Dialogues


1
Monitoring and Evaluation of Public-Private
Dialogues
  • Jesse Biddle
  • Center for International Development
  • State University of New York
  • And
  • Benjamin Herzberg
  • Investment Climate Unit
  • The World Bank

2
Why Develop ME Frameworks forPublic-Private
Dialogues?
  • Donors are increasingly sponsoring PPDs
  • National, Regional and Sector Business Forums
  • Investor Councils
  • Competitiveness Task Forces
  • Need to build knowledge of practices and to
    synthesize lessons learned
  • Case-studies multiplying
  • Several comparative studies
  • Several reviews of donor experiences
  • Development of ME frameworks important next step

3
What do ME Frameworks ProvidePPD Sponsors and
Participants?
  • ME frameworks provide an objective base from
    which to assess program performance
  • ME frameworks provide a foundation and inputs
    for the management of PPD programs
  • The use of ME frameworks over time facilitates
    learning processeswithin and across programs and
    among donors
  • ME frameworks also provide the basis for
    accountability in the use of funds and to the
    public

4
PPD Programs Complications for MEFrameworks
  • Knowledge needed to construct ME logical
    framework is not fully in-hand at program design
    stage
  • Participants in PPDs debate over and may refine
    activities, outputs and outcomes that is,
    participants take program ownership seriously
  • PPDs commonly strive to achieve both hard
    outcomes (e.g., reform of a law) and soft
    outcomes (e.g. build policy reform networks,
    increase social capital)- Soft outcomes can be
    measured but it may be difficult

5
Recommendation 1 Use Charter of Good Practice
at the Design stage of the PPD
  • PPDs are process-oriented programs. The Charter
    of Good Practice identifies a check-list of
    process, structure and function issues to
    consider when designing a PPD
  • Mandate and Institutional Alignment Structure
    and ParticipationOutputs and ImpactsMonitoring
    and EvaluationSub-National RoleSector Specific
    RoleInternational RolePost-Conflict
    ConsiderationsDonor Roles and Responsibilities

6
Recommendation 1 Use Charter of Good Practice
at the Design Stage of the PPD
Mandate and Institutional Alignment Design
Monitoring Index
7
Recommendation 1 Use Charter of Good Practice
at the Design Stage of the PPD
Process monitoring index
8
Recommendation 1 Use Charter of Good Practice
at the Design Stage of the PPD
Stated objectives
12 month process score
6 month process score
9
Recommendation 2 Apply ME LogicalFramework
during PPD Implementation
  • Logical frameworks help answer if a program
    achieved results and so inform consideration of
    different approaches and reexamination of guiding
    assumptions
  • These frameworks are less helpful regarding how
    results were achieved and so less able to clarify
    how program performance can be improved

Outputs
Outcomes
Impact
Inputs
10
Recommendation 2 Apply ME LogicalFramework
during PPD Implementation
  • Engage participants in developing the ME
    framework as a PPD activity
  • Inputs Donor funding, expertise and networks of
    participants
  • Outputs Advisory services, training provided to
    key government agencies (e.g., business
    registration agency)
  • Outcomes Changes in laws, implementation of new
    administrative procedures
  • Impact Increased Rate of Business Registration
    (less informality)
  • Ensure periodic review and revision of the ME
    framework by participants as a PPD activity

11
Recommendation 3 Use ME ProcessFrameworks for
Mid-Stream Correction
  • ME Process Frameworks encourage greater learning
    as regards how program performance can be
    improved
  • Focus Group technique
  • Use of group discussion to collect information,
    clarify details and gather opinions from diverse
    viewpoints
  • Can help validate insights in-hand as to program
    performance
  • Most Significant Change technique
  • Collection and synthesis of accounts of
    significant changes accomplished by the program
  • Review and sharing of accounts helps generate
    lessons learned which can be used by program
    participants, donors

12
How to use ME Frameworks for PPDs?
  • Avoid making PPD too rigid by insisting on
    complete ME Logical Framework at the design
    stage of program
  • Go with the flow PPDs in which participants
    succeed in taking ownership perform better
  • Participants can still be called on to apply ME
    framework to the program
  • Budget for appropriate ME tools for PPDs at the
    design stage of the program
  • The IFC/World Bank, for example, suggest ME
    budgets should be 3-5 of total program budget.
    This may need to be adjusted upwards for PPDs

13
Contact Information
  • Jesse BiddleCenter for International
    DevelopmentState University of New YorkPh.
    518-443-5124 Email jesse.biddle_at_cid.suny.edu
  • Benjamin HerzbergInvestment Climate UnitPrivate
    Sector DevelopmentThe World Bank GroupPh.
    202-458-7846Email bherzberg_at_worldbank.org
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com