Effectiveness: Funder perspectives (B Dornan, Scottish Government)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Effectiveness: Funder perspectives (B Dornan, Scottish Government)

  • 691 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
691
On Slideshare
537
From Embeds
154
Number of Embeds
4

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 154

http://www.nidos.org.uk 136
http://nidos.2020staging.com 9
http://nidos.org.uk 7
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 2

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The Scottish Government and International Development Brian Dornan Head of International Development Team Scottish Government
  • 2. Presentation“Why should the NGO sector strengthen its ability tomeasure and report on outcomes, impacts and results i.e.their effectiveness – and learn from these?”Structure• Why focus on effectiveness and learning?• The IDF structure and approach• Learning from past experience• Recent developments• Next steps• What are we trying to achieve?
  • 3. PresentationWhy focus on effectiveness andlearning?• “External” drivers – – the aid effectiveness agenda, Paris, Busan – Independent Commission on Aid Impact• Continuous improvement - – Financial management, audit and accountability (domestic) – Accountability to wider stakeholders (beneficiaries, partners, governments) – Demonstrating impact (incl. to larger donors) – Learning for improvement
  • 4. PresentationThe International Development Fund (IDF) –structure and approach• Three programmes – Malawi – SSA (Rwanda, Tanzania, Zambia) – South Asia (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)• Grants of up to £1.3m or up to £400k• Some are scalable – but by which donor and through what mechanism?
  • 5. PresentationLearning from past experience:• In earlier funding rounds: – Some excellent examples of thorough M&E However: – Some projects did not use SMART target indicators – Where they were offered, in some cases they were not reported against in final reports – Data sources were not clear – The views of partners or beneficiaries were not recorded – Where good M&E was in place the “story” of the project was not always told – access to the learning was limited.
  • 6. PresentationRecent developments• Desk based review of information reported by projects, considering OECD DAC evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, impact and sustainability• Report on “M&E – current approaches and issues for consideration”• Introduction of logframe to application processes• Guidance on M&E budgets “Spend in the region of 5% would be acceptable…would consider a higher level of spend where the project is innovative or evidence and learning…is critical to support wider work”
  • 7. PresentationNext steps• Consideration and publication of reports• Consideration of M&E proposals in forthcoming funding rounds – more emphasis on refinements• Review and consideration of changes in first half of 2013, for funding round opening in August 2013.• Consideration of harmonisation / simplification of approaches
  • 8. PresentationWhat are we trying to achieve?• Clarifying the purpose, scope and use of M&E (learning – by whom?; accountability – upward or downward?; a focus on meeting targets - or also unexpected impacts?)• Rigorous understanding of project outcomes (appropriate methods, attribution)• Participation (of country stakeholders, in designing, implementing and using M&E)• Alignment with partner government systems, harmonisation of M&E with other donors and transparency in aid data, to comply with international standards• M&E at programme and policy levels• Resourcing and capacity (of SG, grant holders, country stakeholders (M&E report)