Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

IFAD IOE: Evaluation of non-lending activities in IFAD’s operations

7,568 views

Published on

IFAD Independent Office of Evaluation presentation to "Assessing the Impact of Policy Engagement: RIMISP / IFAD Learning Event, Rome 23 June 2015"

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

IFAD IOE: Evaluation of non-lending activities in IFAD’s operations

  1. 1. Independent Office of Evaluation- 1 - Evaluation of non-lending activities in IFAD’s operations Oscar A. Garcia, Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
  2. 2. Independent Office of Evaluation- 2 -  The Independent Office of Evaluation assesses, in country programme evaluations, process, performance and results of non- lending activities (NLA) supported by IFAD and the Government:  Policy dialogue  Knowledge management  Partnership-building IFAD and non-lending activities
  3. 3. Independent Office of Evaluation- 3 -  Used as a framework of reference for evaluating Non-Lending Activities  Suggests a set of key evaluation questions and facilitates the identification of synergies  Grants as sources of inputs for either PD, KM and/or PB Matrix for the evaluation/evaluability
  4. 4. Independent Office of Evaluation- 4 - Matrix for the evaluation/evaluability NLA Evaluation Matrix Policy Dialogue Knowledge Management Partnership- Building Inputs Outputs Outcomes
  5. 5. Independent Office of Evaluation- 5 - 1. On the design of COSOPs: - Which inputs, if any, were earmarked in the COSOP for NLA? - Which NLA outputs, if any, were considered in the COSOP? - Which NLA outcomes, if any, were considered in the COSOP? - Did the COSOP anticipated any synergies between NLA and the lending portfolio? Selected key evaluation questions
  6. 6. Independent Office of Evaluation- 6 - 2. On the implementation of COSOPs: - Which inputs, if any, were used for NLA (PD, KM PB)? - Which NLA outputs, if any, were generated? - Were there any synergies between NLA and the lending portfolio? - Which NLA indicators, if any, were used during implementation of the COSOP? Selected key evaluation questions
  7. 7. Independent Office of Evaluation- 7 - - Are policy dialogue, knowledge management, and partnership-building objectives clearly outlined in the COSOP? Are they relevant to IFAD programme as a whole? - Were resources earmarked for non-lending activities and explicitly outlined in the COSOP? - How was the work and role of Government and other partners taken into account in selecting the focus of non-lending activities? Guiding questions for assessing IFAD’s NLAs -Relevance
  8. 8. Independent Office of Evaluation- 8 - - Did the foreseen activities take place? If not, why? - To what extent and in what way did non-lending activities achieve the objectives? - Did non-lending activities contribute to the replication and/or scaling up of innovation promoted by IFAD? - How well have non-lending components helped ensure a coherent country programme strategy, consistent with the commitments of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness? Selected guiding questions for assessing IFAD’s NLAs -Effectiveness
  9. 9. Independent Office of Evaluation- 9 - • “The extent to which IFAD, Government and others have collaborated on policy processes and contributed to pro-poor policy development in the agriculture and rural sectors”. Policy Dialogue
  10. 10. Independent Office of Evaluation- 10 - Performance of non-lending activities, 2006-2013 Policy dialogue Knowledge management Partnership- building 2006-2008 29% 14% 43% 2007-2009 75% 38% 75% 2008-2010 64% 64% 82% 2009-2011 73% 73% 91% 2010-2012 50% 67% 83% 2011-2013 64% 67% 75% Source: Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations (ARRI), 2014 (Data based on all CPEs since 2006) % moderately satisfactory or better
  11. 11. Independent Office of Evaluation- 11 - Performance of non-lending activities, 2006-2013 Source: Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations (ARRI), 2014 (Data based on all CPEs since 2006)
  12. 12. Independent Office of Evaluation- 12 - • COSOPs specified large and ambitious agenda for PD without specific implementation details. • COSOPs did not discuss the resources needed to carry out PD. • IFAD’s focus during implementation was on projects. • Insufficient efforts made to draw and disseminate lessons learned from projects for influencing PD. Policy Dialogue Assessment in CPEs Source: Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations (ARRI), 2012 – Learning theme
  13. 13. Independent Office of Evaluation- 13 - • IFAD should distinguish between the policy dialogue (PD) that took place, the policies that were adopted to which the PD contributed, and the outcomes of those policies if they were implemented: Proposed framework to evaluate PD Policy dialogue Policy adoption Policy adoption Policy implementation Policy implementation Policy outcomes

×