Evaluation Utilization the case of the Paris Evaluation

Evaluation Utilization: the case of the Paris Evaluation (Phase 1) and its use in the Accra HLF 3 process Paris Evaluation Phase 2 Planning Meeting, Feb 2009 1

Contributed to all aspects of the 3 rd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness: • Preparatory process – studies engaged wide range of players on implications of Paris commitments, supporting and blocking factors • At the event, briefings to the 9 Roundtables, and major inputs to – Aid effectiveness in situations of fragility and conflict (thematic study) – Managing for development results • Negotiation process and content of the AAA. 2

Specific contributions - Evidence • Holding up the mirror (accountability) – on the gaps between Paris commitment and actual changes in policies, systems and behaviours – particularly the donor case studies • Polishing the mirror (broadening and deepening the evidence base): – Validating self-assessments and monitoring processes – Highlighting aspects not well-covered by the Monitoring Survey – Deepening understanding of reasons behind weak & variable implementation as reflected in performance monitoring – Highlighting possibilities and priorities for action through multiple and diverse studies - donor, country and thematic 3

Specific Contributions: Voice • Amplifier – perspectives of developing countries on aid effectiveness, particularly through the country case studies – use of emerging evidence in Regional Consultations, & by PCCG in negotiation process • Challenger – e. g. – PD doesn’t apply to aid delivered in fragile and conflict situations – over-focus on indicators – underlined critical importance of less well monitored indicators – ownership, conditionality, medium term predictability, mutual accountability 4

Specific contributions – Influence policy change Informed AAA negotiation process, by highlighting – Paris not just a technical agenda of aid management, but about broader reform of international relationships in a rapidly changing context – Political leadership urgently needed to rapidly deliver aid reform if the PD to remain relevant And AAA content focus, e. g – Country leadership of aid management, country-led evaluation of policy – Alignment, from evidence on disparity between reform & use of country systems – Accountability: joint assessments, disclosure, facilitate parliamentary scrutiny, independent evidence – Relevance to diverse contexts – Relevance to all types of aid inc global funds, cso’s 5

Some limitations to use … (that Phase 2 will address? ) • Expectations from political/senior levels that Phase 1 would ‘give the answers’ on development impact of PD… Phase 2 key focus (and key challenge) • Timing …ensure findings well in advance of start of HLF 4 negotiations • Comprehensiveness & limited comparability across countries, contexts and modalities … key aspects of Phase 2 design? 6