DANIDA’s Experience of Results Managing for Development Results Peter Ellehøj – Quality Assurance Department November 2011

Outline: The intricacies of setting up a results framework Results: –For whom? –What results? –By whom? –How to tell the story?

Setting up a Results Framework Danish Development Cooperation decentralised in 2003 Common and transparente set of guidelines (www. amg.um.dk) Setting a Performance Management Framework in 2005 Linking Field and HQ

Managing for Development Results 1.Setting goals 1.Setting goals and agreeing on targets and strategies; resources 2.Allocating the available resources to activities that will contribute to achievement of the desired results; 3.Monitoring and evaluating 3.Monitoring and evaluating whether the resources allocated are making the intended difference; 4.Reporting 4.Reporting on performance to the public; (donors, stakeholders, and taxpayers) 5.Feeding back information 5.Feeding back information to decision making for better results.

1. Setting goals and agreeing on targets and strategies;

8 2. Allocating the available resources Embassy Results & Planning Contracts MRS & VPA MFA Goals and Targets System (MRS) Overall goals (plan of action) Centrally set targets Country frame Local Grants Sector frames commitments Indicators Country Assessments Monitoring at programme / project level Programme Assessments Embassy Staffing Embassy Operational Resources Danida Advisors

3. Monitoring and evaluating

4. Reporting on performance to the public

Memorandum of Understanding Budget support assessment Programme Completion Report Review Report Progress and Financial Reports Annual Work Plan and Budget TOR Joint Decision- making Body/Steering Committee Preparatory Studies, feasibility 5. Feeding back information to decision making Final Programme Documents Inception Report Appropriation Note Appraisal Process Annual Review Annual Audit Evaluation Report Concept Paper Climate & Environment Screening Gender Plan Strategic Choices Lessons learned Monitoring Knowledge sharing Audit Report Draft Programme Documents Government & implementing Partner Agreements Process Action Plan Formulation Process Appraisal Report Analysis of aid modality and delivery Evaluation Analytical work 1. Preparation Phase 2. Formula- tion and appraisal Phase 3. Financing Decision 4. Imple- mentation Phase 5. Completion Phase Danish Finance Committe Approval Danida Board Recommendation Danish Minister’s Approval Appropriation Process Appropriation Committee Recommendation

Results Framework – Work in progress Three purposes: Framework – FAQ – Action Plan Difficult storytelling – balance – Few inspirations Appreciate feedback Beta version – reviewed after HLF Busan

Results – For whom? Domestic perceptions –Corruption & administration –Still strong backing –Variegated: Ms Jensen, Press, Parliament and Auditors Partner countries –Mutual accountability & Transparency in practice Planting the flag? How to make it relevant? International –CRS++ and IATI Staff –Why are we doing this?

Results – What results? Output, outcome and impact Perspective on administration and misuse Adressing risk – risk management to achieve sustainable results

Results – By whom? Quality of data – getting stakeholders aboard –Field offices –Partners Implications for programming setup (guidelines) Mutual Accountability & Transparency

Results – How to tell the story? Perspectives: Linking efforts –Risk management –Results – attribution vs. contribution HLF Busan