Upload
chrystal-charles
View
220
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MULTILATERAL ORGANISATION PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT NETWORK
The MOPAN Common Approach 2009Presentation to DAC Network on Development Evaluation 15 June 2009
1
Purpose
Introduce MOPAN andCommon Approach Background
Data collection and follow-up Key players Challenges – Looking ahead
Discussion
2
What is MOPAN?
Informal network 15 like-minded donor countries Common interest in assessing
organisational effectiveness of major multilateral organisations they fund
3
How does MOPAN work?
Joint assessments Share information Draw on experience in monitoring
and evaluation
4
Current MOPAN members
Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, The United Kingdom
5
Common Approach
Annual assesment of select group of multilateral organisations in 8-10 developing countries.
Generates information members can use to fulfil responsibilities and obligations as bilateral donors.
6
Common Approach
Aiming to support dialogue between MOPAN members, multilateral organisations and their partners.
7
Common Approach
Provides evidence base for MOPAN members, multilateral organisations and direct partners to discuss organisational effectiveness in order to build better understanding and improve performance.
8
Common Approach
Derived from, and meant to replace, seven existing bilateral assessment tools and forestall the development of other assessment approaches.
Does not examine development effectiveness, achievement of development results or scrutinise administrative economy or efficiency.
9
Common Approach
New methodology, but builds on previous MOPAN experience of bilateral assessments and dialogue with multilateral organisations and learning
10
Why a Common Approach?
Growing demands internationally to better understand how public funds are used for international aid purposes, including multilateral assistance.
No widely accepted, coherent approach to assessing effectiveness.
11
Why a Common Approach?
Need to: Capture voice of direct partners,
not just MOPAN member views Harmonise work to avoid duplication Broaden and deepen original
‘perceptions-based’ approach.
12
Organisations assessed 2009
UNICEF UNDP AfDB World Bank (IDA and IBRD)
13
Data collection—survey
Survey measures: Four Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
relating to management:
Strategic, operational, relationship, and knowledge management
More detailed micro-indicators (MIs).
14
Data collection—survey
Survey completed by three sources:
1. MOPAN member officials at HQ level, including missions, delegations and representations
2. MOPAN member officials,country level
3. Multilateral organisation direct partners, country level.
15
Data collection
Respondents provided with ‘document fact check’—documents published by multilateral organisations they can use to inform their survey responses.
16
Direct Partners
Organisations receiving direct transfer of finances or technical assistance from multilateral organisation.
Can be government, non-government, private sector corporations.
17
Findings
Country level Support discussion between developing
country partners, bilateral donors and the multilateral organisations, as part of the process of strengthening mutual accountability at country level
Strengthen relationships with multilateral organisations at country level
18
Findings
HQ level Input to those responsible for the
governance of multilateral organisations Input to multilateral cooperation policies Input to wider debates about multilateral
organisational effectiveness
19
Findings
Multilateral organisations invited to respond to review findings
20
Findings
Not used to rank performance of multilateral organisations, or evaluate how well they deliver on development objectives and projects.
Not possible to compare multilateral organisations—their mandates and structures vary too much in scope and nature.
21
Findings
Because the MOPAN assessment is repeated at intervals of time, findings will help determine if multilateral organisation effectiveness in survey areas change over time.
22
Reporting
Country reports (nine countries) Institutional reports (four
multilateral organisations) Timeframes for development of
draft and final reports being finalised.
23
Key players
MOPAN Secretariat (Denmark 2009) Oversee and coordinate work of lead
consultants, HQ Focal Points, Institutional Leads, Country Leads
Seek advice from working groups Act as primary contact point for external
partners
24
Key players
MOPAN HQ Focal Points Liaise with Country Leads Ensure support in their organisations Organise/supervise survey HQ level Support survey process in-country Coordinate comments on draft reports
25
Key players
MOPAN Institutional Leads Key interface between MOPAN and
multilateral organisations under review Liaise between MOPAN and multilateral
organisations at HQ level
26
Key players
MOPAN Country Leads Liaise with HQ Focal Points and focal points
of multilateral organisations at country level Build awareness of, and support for,
Common Approach Organise assessment at country level Lead country-level dialogue on findings
and coordinate comments
27
Key players
Consultants Manage implementation of
Common Approach 2009 Prepare reports Prepare presentations of findings
28
Challenges: Balance Between
Low transaction costs for MO and MOPAN staff
Simple tool Not a full-blown
assessment.
Provide useful data and meaningful information to make decisions (perception based + objective).
Replace all bilateral assessment instruments.
29
Challenges: Engaging Partners
Partners want to participate in MOPAN’s work
Highlighted additional areas for inclusion in CAMO Policies and Procedure
Transparency of MOs
Alignment of MOs
How to Participate in the survey and dialogue
Link to mutual accountability agenda
30
LOOKING AHEAD
31