Country Ownership in Program Design

From Principles to Practice

What is MCC?• Established in 2004, a USG Corporation• Mandate: reduce poverty through growth• Programs: large-scale five-year grants• Partners: well governed, investing in their

people, providing economic freedoms• Independence: executive board• Principles: country ownership,

accountability for results

MCC partnersAfrica (14)BeninBurkina FasoCape VerdeGhanaLesotho MadagascarMalawiMaliMoroccoMozambiqueNamibia SenegalTanzaniaZambia

Latin America (4)El Salvador HondurasNicaragua*

Europe/Asia (8)ArmeniaGeorgiaJordan IndonesiaMongoliaMoldovaPhilippinesVanuatu

MCC Programs by Sector

Monitoring and Evaluation 2%

Transportation 34%

Agriculture 21%

Finance and En-terprise Devel-

opment 9%

Water Supply & Sanitation 8%

Health, Educ. & Comm. Services

7%

Governance 5%

Energy; 5%

Program Admin. & Oversight, 9%

The Principles

• Local solutions, not imposed• Better governed are better bets• More willing to pursue and be accountable

for programs of their own making• More willing to undertake difficult reforms• Sustainability

The Early Years• MCC’s pure approach – hands off!

Really?• Nationwide consultations = nationwide

expectations• Partner countries’ time and political capital • Is the oatmeal too hot or too cold?• Program redesign – abandonment of

principle?• Response: early engagement on a vision

Bounding the Universe

• Constraints analysis - finding a shared vision

• Defining the world of the possible• Political economy of proposals• Defense against “pet” projects, but not

enough to indentify good projects• Response: meaningful consultations

So who is the “Country”?• It matters who you ask• Elite capture• Stakeholders or the usual suspects?• Meaningful consultations: from

information to partnership• Country, culture and political contexts• Role of Constraints Analysis in framing

Results Focused Project Design

• The real stakeholders• Do they agree on the problem?• What does the ideal state look like?• What’s holding us back?• Oops, what if the problem isn’t money

A more realistic ownership?

• Attributes not project guidance– Sound program rationale from activities to

outcomes that can be measured– Capacity – existing and opportunities– Policy environment and sustainability– Implementation risks of all types– Crowd in other actors– The list goes on…

• Communication and misunderstandings

12

CAN BE COMPLETEDIN FIVE YEARS

HIGH POTENTIAL

RETURNS (ERR)

WITHIN CAPACITY OF SPONSOR

PRO POOR

MANAGABLEENVIRONMENT

AND SOCIAL RISKS

SUPPORTIVEPOLICY

ENVIRONMENT

IS THERE A PROJECT ?

Getting to yes• Concept papers – early heart to heart• Peer review• Grants for project development• Appraisal of findings• Negotiating compact scope

Lessons along the continuum

• Strong appreciation for the principle• Some frustration with the practice• Wide variety of experiences• Tensions between ownership and

stewardship• Owning policies more important than

programs• Ownership of implementation

15

MCC Program Development Cycle

Implementation Preparation

Development and Appraisal

Concept Assessment

Concept Papers

Project Identification – Stakeholder Analysis

Initial Consultations

Constraints Analysis

THANK YOU