Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$CQE=U]^\]Z: KAZAKHSTAN - OECD Online Bookshop$

Evaluating Country Programmes 206 technical assistance through the BMZ and its implementing agencies, i.e. double the number of countries for which there are country concepts. The decision to confine the preparation of country concepts to partner countries that receive substantial German development assistance is due to practical considerations and does not mean that there are different criteria for the design of country programmes. Hence, evaluating the engagement of German development co-operation in countries for which the BMZ has not prepared country concepts means applying the same criteria as mentioned in Box 8.3. The difference for the evaluator, however, lies in the need to reconstruct the intended goals, rationale and internal consistency of the country programme (project portfolio) from the available documentation (country notes, summary records of government consultations and negotiations, project appraisals, etc.). Ideally, the country programme being evaluated is based on a coherent strategy (with clearly identified and relevant priority areas, and coherent approaches in the priority areas) except that the strategy has not been stated explicitly in a formal country concept. At the worst, the country programme consists of an incoherent assortment of individual projects. Needless to say, the worst scenario is also possible even when there is a country concept – if the latter has failed to conceive coherent strategies for the priority areas selected. Notes 1. This chapter is largely based on: the BMZ’s guidelines for preparing and using country concepts (the original version of 1991 was updated in 1994 and 1999), and J. Kenneweg: Country Strategy Paper for German Development Co-operation. “Country Concept” (CC), presented at the European Meeting on Country Strategies in Development Cooperation, Stockholm, 15-16 June 1998. 2. See also OECD/DAC: Development Co-operation Review Series No. 29 – Germany, Paris 1998, 3. The quotations refer to the 1994 version of the BMZ guidelines for preparing and using country concepts. OECD 1999
Introduction OECD 1999 Chapter 9 The Anatomy of Country Assistance Evaluation: Case Study of the OED Philippines CAR by Gianni Zanini Operation Evaluation Department, World Bank When the Operation Evaluation Department (OED) began work on the Philippines in early 1997, our methodology for country assistance evaluations was still in its infancy. Five country assistance reviews (CARs) had been completed, and two others were underway. Since 1997, our methodology has evolved further and our range of products has expanded to include shorter, less resource-intensive country assistance notes (CANs). This chapter illustrates the process and methodology issues related to the Philippines CAR. The Philippines represented an interesting case. It was experiencing rising growth rates in the mid-1990s, but was a laggard with respect to the East Asian miracle economies. It was an early adjuster, but with hiccups in a difficult political environment. It had achieved a broad political consensus on a liberalised, exportoriented environment, but was still not a major recipient of FDI (Foreign Direct Investment). It still had a large Bank assistance programme, but Bank lending was diminishing due to large private capital inflows. The timing of our CAR was driven by the desire to influence the preparation of the next Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) by the Bank. The Philippines is on a 3-year CAS cycle, with a progress report scheduled in between. The Philippines CAR was due to be completed around the time of a progress report (early 1998), well in advance of the preparatory work for a full CAS (expected in mid-1999). Indeed, for maximum impact it is better to issue our country evaluations just before a CAS progress report rather than just before a full CAS. In the former case, CAS preparation takes place after the Bank has had a chance to absorb the findings and recommendations of the report and subsequent guidance from the Executive Directors based on the evaluation findings and the region’s presentation of a progress report. In the latter case, however, there is usually not enough time for 207
Page 1 and 2:
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERAT
Page 3 and 4:
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERAT
Page 5 and 6:
Evaluating Country Programmes 4 The
Page 7 and 8:
Evaluating Country Programmes 6 SDC
Page 9 and 10:
OECD 1999 Glossary of Acronyms and
Page 11 and 12:
Introduction OECD 1999 Chapter 1 Co
Page 13 and 14:
Rationale, purpose and use OECD 199
Page 15 and 16:
OECD 1999 Country Programme Evaluat
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
DONOR INFLUENCES Evaluation skills
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
13.00-14.30 Lunch break 14.30-15.30
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
OECD 1999 FINLANDE/FINLAND Ms. Eeva
Page 47 and 48:
OECD 1999 PORTUGAL Mr. Mario Mendes
Page 49 and 50:
Mr. Wolfgang GRUBER Director, Proje
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Evaluating Country Programmes 54 It
Page 55 and 56:
OECD 1999 56 Mali . . . . . . . . .
Page 57 and 58:
Evaluating Country Programmes 58 -
Page 59 and 60:
Evaluating Country Programmes 60 po
Page 61 and 62:
Evaluating Country Programmes 62 Bo
Page 63 and 64:
Evaluating Country Programmes 64 -
Page 65 and 66:
Evaluating Country Programmes 66 In
Page 67 and 68:
Evaluating Country Programmes 68 Ti
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Evaluating Country Programmes 72 Re
Page 73 and 74:
Evaluating Country Programmes 74 pe
Page 75 and 76:
Evaluating Country Programmes 76 va
Page 77 and 78:
Evaluating Country Programmes 78 (e
Page 79 and 80:
Evaluating Country Programmes 80 Th
Page 81 and 82:
Evaluating Country Programmes 82 ou
Page 83 and 84:
Evaluating Country Programmes 84 Wi
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Evaluating Country Programmes 88 Ap
Page 89 and 90:
OECD 1999 Appendix 2.3 Complete Lis
Page 91 and 92:
OECD 1999 93 Complete list of known
Page 93 and 94:
OECD 1999 95 Complete list of known
Page 95 and 96:
OECD 1999 The CPE review instrument
Page 97 and 98:
OECD 1999 Appendix 2.5 List of Dono
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
OECD 1999 Checklist of questions (c
Page 103 and 104:
Country programme evaluations - See
Page 105 and 106:
Summary OECD 1999 Chapter 3 Country
Page 107 and 108:
Background OECD 1999 CPE in the Net
Page 109 and 110:
CPE in the Netherland’s Developme
Page 111 and 112:
OECD 1999 CPE in the Netherland’s
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Methodology OECD 1999 CPE in the Ne
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Evaluating Country Programmes 124 P
Page 123 and 124:
Evaluating Country Programmes 126 G
Page 125 and 126:
Evaluating Country Programmes 128 R
Page 127 and 128:
Evaluating Country Programmes 130 3
Page 129 and 130:
Evaluating Country Programmes 132 P
Page 131 and 132:
Evaluating Country Programmes 134 Y
Page 133 and 134:
Evaluating Country Programmes 136 N
Page 135 and 136:
Evaluating Country Programmes 138 O
Page 137 and 138:
Evaluating Country Programmes 140 p
Page 139 and 140:
Evaluating Country Programmes 142 R
Page 141 and 142:
Chapter 5 Country Assistance Evalua
Page 143 and 144:
Country Assistance Evaluation in th
Page 145 and 146:
OECD 1999 Country Assistance Evalua
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152: OECD 1999 Country Assistance Evalua
Page 153 and 154: Traditional tools: relevance, effic
Page 155 and 156: Measuring sustainability OECD 1999
Page 159 and 160: Rating country strategies and assis
Page 169 and 170: OECD 1999 Chapter 6 French Experien
Page 171 and 172: OECD 1999 French Experience with Co
Page 173 and 174: OECD 1999 French Experience with Co
Page 175 and 176: French Experience with Country Prog
Page 177 and 178: OECD 1999 Chapter 7 Issues for Coun
Page 179 and 180: Issues for Country Evaluation: The
Page 181 and 182: Issues for Country Evaluation: The
Page 183 and 184: OECD 1999 Issues for Country Evalua
Page 185 and 186: Introduction OECD 1999 Chapter 8 Co
Page 187 and 188: OECD 1999 Country Assistance Strate
Page 191 and 192: Country Assistance Strategies as a
Page 201: OECD 1999 Country Assistance Strate
Page 211 and 212: Executive summary OECD 1999 Chapter
Page 213 and 214: OECD 1999 Country Programme Plannin
Page 227 and 228: OECD 1999 Chapter 11 Real Progress:
Page 229 and 230: Real Progress: Fifty Years of USAID
Page 233 and 234: OECD 1999 Real Progress: Fifty Year
Page 249 and 250: Assessment OECD 1999 Real Progress:
Page 253 and 254:
Real Progress: Fifty Years of USAID
Page 255 and 256:
Sectoral successes: activities with
Page 257 and 258:
Evaluation of macro-level performan
Page 259 and 260:
Real Progress: Fifty Years of USAID
Page 261 and 262:
OECD 1999 Real Progress: Fifty Year
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
OECD 1999 Appendix 11.1 Sectoral an
Page 271 and 272:
OECD 1999 Bibliography Real Progres
show all

Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?