Presentation on theme: "The Global Partnership Monitoring Framework Update on Indicator to Measure Transparency IATI Steering Committee, 3 October, Copenhagen www.effectivecooperation.org."— Presentation transcript:
The Global Partnership Monitoring Framework Update on Indicator to Measure Transparency IATI Steering Committee, 3 October, Copenhagen www.effectivecooperation.org
Where are we coming from? Busan HLF4 (2011) “…implement a common, open standard for electronic publication of timely, comprehensive and forward looking information on resources provided through development cooperation...” “Agree, by June 2012, on a selective and relevant set of indicators and targets through which we will monitor progress” Post-Busan Interim Group → WP-EFF June 2012 Global Partnership monitoring Framework Indicator 4: “Measure of state of implementation of the common standard by co-operation providers” Indicator development (joint UNDP-OECD support team) Consultations with Ad Hoc Group on the Common Standard Technical work among Core Group of experts
What is the political approach? Accelerate and deepen efforts to implement the common standard – enhanced accountability Improve the availability and public accessibility of information on development co-operation – transparency vis-à-vis all stakeholders Deliver a feasible and practical pilot indicator to measure implementation and progress Facilitate political debate on transparency at ministerial-level meeting Global transparency agenda is broad – need a strong narrative
What is the ‘practical’ approach? Measure providers’ actual delivery of information Build on existing data and systems Simple, graduated measure of implementation Assess providers’ information provision to the systems of the common standard (IATI and OECD/DAC CRS and FSS) Focus on Official Development Finance (bilaterals & multilaterals) Composite, quantitative indicator delivering one score/grade (out of 5) for each provider
Coverage Timeliness - Frequency of updates - Freshness of information / time lags [monthly / quarterly / semi-annual / annual] Comprehensiveness - Level of detail [information in common standard data fields] Forward looking - How many years ahead - How disaggregated [1, 2 or 3 years; activity / sector / country level] What are we measuring?
Why coverage? One element of comprehensiveness Putting the information in ‘size context’ Latest verified figure for annual disbursements ODF Common Standard Reporting
Core group to finalise technical work, joint support team to issue proposal for feedback by mid-October (online consultation) Joint support team to finalise indicator and lead assessment for progress report (continued collaboration with common standard secretariats) Nov-Dec Complementary evidence to enrich the narrative: members contributions in the run-up to the ministerial In the spirit of a pilot approach… Test methodology, assess strengths/weaknesses, refine if appropriate. Future aspirations (long-term) Quality of information Broader coverage of actors – how to assess compliance with common standard beyond existing reporting systems? What happens next?
Use online consultation to familiarise yourself with the indicator, provide feedback and mobilise political support for this assessment (2 nd half of October) Provide complementary evidence to enrich the narrative: Contribute your ideas through the e-discussion! Feedback Initial reactions to the approach? How can we work together so that this resonates politically? Beyond the common, open standard, what are the key transparency issues where progress is taking place or persistent challenges remain? What can you do?