|
Independent research & practical ideas for global prosperity
|
|
|
|
Independent research & practical ideas for global prosperity
|
|
Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Blog
Posts Tagged: Monitoring & EvaluationNew Foreign Assistance Legislation Promotes Transparency and AccountabilityOctober 14, 2011Posted by Connie Veillette in Aid Effectiveness, Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Tags: Aid Effectiveness, Monitoring & Evaluation
This is a joint post with Will McKitterick. In this season of budget battles and extreme partisanship, seeing eye to eye on the Hill is a rare commodity. Nevertheless, in an unusual moment of bipartisan agreement, Members of Congress introduced a bill that takes two big steps towards making U.S. foreign assistance more transparent, accountable, and effective. Introduced by Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) and Howard Berman (D-CA), the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 3159) achieved strong bipartisan backing from 30 cosponsors in the House. The bill follows in the footsteps of reform recommendations offered by the administration in the PPD and QDDR, and legislation introduced the 111th Congress.[1] Simply put, H.R. 3159 seeks to eliminate ineffective aid programs and bolster those that work by strengthening the government’s foreign assistance monitoring and evaluation regime. In doing so, it may also save the tax payer a pretty penny. Comment »The New USAID Evaluation Policy is Not Getting Nearly Enough AttentionFebruary 1, 2011Posted by Nancy Birdsall in Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Tags: 3IE, Monitoring & Evaluation, USAID
This is a joint post with Rita Perakis. USAID’s new evaluation policy, announced by Raj Shah at a CGD event on January 19, and written about by Bill Savedoff already on this site here, is not getting nearly enough attention. It not only outlines a new policy. It amounts to fostering a new culture, of transparency and learning. In a presentation on the new policy hosted yesterday by Carol Lancaster, Dean of the Georgetown School of Foreign Service, Ruth Levine of USAID said the new policy responds to the “need to learn” and to “generate accountability”, noting there can be tension between those two. Here are things to like about it beyond what Bill already highlighted – with some notes of caution (the “buts” below): Read More… 1 Comment »USAID Announces Serious Commitment to Evaluation and Joins 3ieJanuary 20, 2011Posted by William Savedoff in Aid Effectiveness, Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Tags: Monitoring & Evaluation, USAID
Yesterday CGD hosted an event at which Raj Shah, marking his first year as USAID Administrator, gave a major speech to present the changes he has been introducing at USAID and to announce a new evaluation policy. Shah said that USAID is “relentlessly focused on delivering results and learning from success and failure.” But you cannot learn without documenting what you’ve done. So Shah’s team, including his evaluation director Ruth Levine, have worked out a number of changes at USAID that represent a new and serious commitment to evaluation. A key aspect of the new policy is that it distinguishes between performance evaluations and impact evaluations. Performance evaluations will be required for all USAID projects and are primarily focused on monitoring whether activities have proceeded as planned. By contrast, impact evaluations are meant to be selective, focused on programs with approaches that are innovative or hold promise but which are not yet proven. Rigorous impact evaluations have been relatively rare among development agencies until this past decade, a problem highlighted in the final report of CGD’s Evaluation Gap Working Group, “When Will We Ever Learn?” (co-authored by myself, Ruth Levine and Nancy Birdsall on behalf of the working group). So, it is commendable that USAID’s new policy commits an average of 3% of program budgets to these impact analyses and consequently for learning which programs make a difference. Read More… 2 Comments »Saga in El Salvador: Questions of Progress and OwnershipOctober 1, 2008Posted by Amy Crone in Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Tags: Monitoring & EvaluationA local newspaper reported the resignation of Juan José Llort, the Executive Director of Fomilenio, with accusations that U.S. Ambassador Glazer had a hand in his dismissal. Deserved or not, Llort’s departure, 2 months prior to breaking ground on the largest component of the compact, the Northern Longitudinal Road, may cause implementation delays El Salvador cannot afford. And true or not, the involvement of Ambassador Glazer may leave Salvadorans questioning just how real the country ownership element of the MCC model is. For any of our readers on the ground, or with contacts in El Salvador, join the conversation and fill us in on the facts. Comment »
|
|
|
|
CENTER FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT
1800 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Third Floor
Washington DC 20036
Tel 202.416.4000 | Fax 202.416.4050
|
|
|
Print
Share
