Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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

Evaluating Country Programmes 218 integrated into the Federal Department of Public Economy (FDPE). 5 The SDC guidelines are a mandatory framework for the long-term planning and execution of the bilateral programme in those partner countries which have established the responsibility for the formulation and implementation of the country programme with the responsible for the SDC geographical division concerned. The activities of the Division for Humanitarian Aid and Swiss Disaster Relief (HA/SDR) are included in the country programme. FOFEA is responsible for all matters of the country programme which come under its direction. The Swiss system of development aid has another dual feature: the country programme, which is managed jointly by the desk at SDC-HQ and the SDC co-ordination office in the partner country. Following the agreed decentralisation process within SDC, the co-ordination offices have an increasing responsibility in the management of the whole process of the country programme formulation, implementation and evaluation. The country programme must contain the following information: – Assessments of the context and trends. – Overall goals and development strategy. – Support concept/policy. – Target sectors and cross-sectional priorities. – Reference to the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) of the World Bank, and strategic documents of other donor agencies (similarities/differences). – Geographical concentration within the respective country. – Indication of financial volume. – Choice of partners. The process of preparation and clearance of the CP is determined as follows: – The Geographical Division informs all potentially involved services, units and organisations about the preparation procedure. – The Geographical Division presents an outline of the country programme (5 pages) to the Board of Directors at an early stage, including the following points: an assessment of the country programme in a medium-term perspective, learning from the past and new strategic orientations, implementation of SDC priorities/cross-sectional themes, basic policy questions such as donor co-ordination, risks and opportunities, etc. The Board of Directors decides on the direction of the further elaboration process. – The Geographical Division or the Co-ordination Office prepares a draft (with contributions from any technical services involved, Division HA/SDR, FOFEA, executing agencies or contract organisations, consultants and experts, etc.). OECD 1999
OECD 1999 Country Programme Planning and Country Programme Evaluation within SDC – The draft is distributed to all involved parties and a consultation meeting is organised where the Political Affairs Division (FDFA) provides its foreign policy assessment. – The document is cleared by the Geographical Division and submitted with the minutes of the consultation meeting to different committees and directorates outside SDC, and to other interested parties. – The country programme is approved and signed by the SDC Director. Generally, FOFEA considers the country programme a reference document. In recent cases, the co-responsibility of a programme was assured by the cosignature of the Director of FOFEA (e.g. Bolivia). Linkage between planning and evaluation The planning process is determined in the SDC guidelines. However, the way to elaborate the final country programme document differs between the geographical divisions according to their organisational culture. The different processes of elaboration can be defined as follows: – Elaboration by the co-ordinator/desk officer as a one-person-job (first “generation” of country programmes). – Elaboration by the team of expatriates at the co-ordination office. – Further incorporation of the National Programme Officers (NPOs) and eventually the project leaders. – Incorporation of national opinion leaders and/or experts (view from outside). – A process of linked participatory workshops. These options for elaboration still coexist within SDC and are due to the historical development of the different CPs. While some countries have already elaborated their third country programme and can, therefore, count on a certain continuity, others have only recently started this process (see Appendix 10.1). Whether the issue of the country programme is continuity, reorientation or basic policy decision has an influence on the methodologies chosen and leads to processes which are adapted to the specific premises as well as to the context of the country programme. However, there is also an aspect of distinct approaches (inductive vs. deductive) existing in different geographical divisions, which influence the choice of methodology (see Section 4 below). All geographical divisions agree that the evaluation of the former country programme is a necessary step in the planning of the next one. In most cases, a tendency towards self-evaluation workshops can be noticed. This approach is particularly strong in the West Africa Division where an involvement of the partners in the evaluation as well as in the planning processes is a common practice. The most evolved approaches in terms of linking participatory processes between 219
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:
Page 153 and 154:
Traditional tools: relevance, effic
Page 155 and 156:
Measuring sustainability OECD 1999
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Rating country strategies and assis
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164: OECD 1999 Country Assistance Evalua
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 203 and 204: Introduction OECD 1999 Chapter 9 Th
Page 211 and 212: Executive summary OECD 1999 Chapter
Page 213: OECD 1999 Country Programme Plannin
Page 217 and 218: 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 255 and 256: Sectoral successes: activities with
Page 257 and 258: Evaluation of macro-level performan
Page 265 and 266:
OECD 1999 Real Progress: Fifty Year
Page 267 and 268:
OECD 1999 Real Progress: Fifty Year
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?