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

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. 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. 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. Independent Office of Evaluation- 4 -
Matrix for the evaluation/evaluability
NLA
Evaluation
Matrix
Policy
Dialogue
Knowledge
Management
Partnership-
Building
Inputs
Outputs
Outcomes

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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