1

 Policy requirement – achieving 100% coverage  Unit of accountability – 20 countries of focus  Paris principles – non investment issues  An integrating narrative  History 2

 After 4 years and nearly 20 CPEs – time to reflect  Does the standard methodology serves us well? ◦ Rating scales ◦ Project samples ◦ Numerous criteria  What is the audience? Are users satisfied?  International literature, analysis of past CPEs, interviews with senior executives, program managers, Evaluation Committee, representatives of bilateral development agencies, and external consultants. 3

 Option 1: Status quo – strong on accountability (external audience)  Option 2: More learning and user focus  Option 3: Totally decentralised – let programs take the lead  Overwhelming preference – Option 2 4

Revised Focus for CPEs  Better balance between learning and accountability, but retain rating scales  More focus on depth than breadth of analysis  More analysis of policy coherence across delivery channels  More thorough analysis of Relevance and Rationale (doing the right things?)  More emphasis on program than projects 5

Modifications to Design & Methodology  Greater flexibility in evaluation design and products  Use of a smaller number of evaluation criteria and simplified rating system  VfM – improved measures for Efficiency, Economy and Equity  Increased use of contribution analysis  Targeted coverage of delivery channels  Improved usefulness of recommendations 6

 Renewed emphasis on neutrality and engagement  Clarity of roles between DFATD and consultants  Improved availability of supporting documents/ data for data collection and analysis  More timely evaluations to increase their usefulness to programs 7