Introduction

HLF Overview

2006 Survey

2008 Survey

Tom BeloeUNDP Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific

Jakarta 12th February

Accra High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness

Overview

Jakarta 12th February

How did we get where we are?

2003 Rome High-Level Forum on harmonisation (HLF-1)

2005 Paris HLF on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-2)– 100 countries and organisations.– Set indicators and targets for 2010– Framework for mutual accountability.

2008 Accra HLF on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-3)– Assess progress in implementing Paris Declaration.– Deepen implementation & respond to emerging

issues– Take action & revitalise agenda.

2011 HLF-4 – venue to be decided

The event

A 3 day meeting held in Accra on 2-4 September 2008.

800-1000 participants expected from:– 80 Partner countries (approx 5 per delegation).– 50 Donor countries or organisations.– Civil Society organisations.

Representation at Ministerial or Heads of Agency level.

Links to Ecosoc and Doha process;

The purpose

Create high-level support for reform.

Take stock and review progress.

Decide on actions that will increase the impact of aid on development (Accra Action Agenda).

The structure of the event

MA

RK

ET P

LA

CE

DAY 1 RT

1

PLENARY SESSION

RT 2

RT 3

am

pm

DAY 2 RT

7RT 8

RT 9

am

pm

DAY 3

MINISTERIALam

pm

RT 4

RT 5

RT 6

MINISTERIAL

Purpose of the RTs

Opportunity for in-depth discussion at Accra.

Identify actions that:– Advance the agenda & remove

bottlenecks.– High impacts on development.– Require high-level commitment.

Results captured in a publication.

List of Round Tables

1. Country ownership

2. Alignment - use of country systems, untying, predictability.

3. Harmonisation - rationalising aid delivery, complementarity, division of labour.

4. Managing for results and Development impact.

5. Mutual accountability.

6. Role of CSOs in advancing aid effectiveness

7. Aid Effectiveness in Fragile States and conflict situations

8. Sector application of the Paris Declaration: health, education, infrastructure

9. Aid architecture – South-South partners, vertical funds

Preparations

Consultations– Accra Agenda for Action– Round tables– Asia perspective document

Government of Ghana led strategy

Survey and country contributions

2006 Survey on Monitoring the Paris

DeclarationKey findings & challenges

Jakarta • 12th February 2008

2006 Survey findings

Policy and enabling environment: key determining factor

Summary of results based on three themes:– Predictability– Accountability– Cost effectiveness

Predictability of aid

Aid is predictable when donors actually disburse:– What was previously agreed…– …when it was agreed.

Countries cannot make full use of aid when it is unpredictable.

Predictable aid contributes to achieving development results.

Was aid predictable in 2005?

41% of aid was disbursed on schedule in 2005

EGYPT

AID SCHEDULED

AID RECEIVED

$ 1

420

m

$ 99

8 m

AFGHANISTAN

$ 1

061

m$

1 26

2

m

ZAMBIA

$ 93

0 m

$ 69

6 m

Accountability of aid

Aid is accountable when it is:– Connected to country policies & policy

processes.– Subject to normal democratic scrutiny.

Scrutiny mechanisms are often weak:– Parliamentary scrutiny of budgets.– Supreme Audit Institutions.– Large chunks of aid are not recorded

in budgets.

Was aid accountable in 2005?

42% of aid was recorded in countries’ budgets

GOV.BUDGET ESTIMATES

AID DISBURSED

EGYPT

$ 58

1 m

$ 99

8 m

ZAMBIA

$ 36

1 m

$ 69

6 m$

885

m

$ 62

8 m

BOLIVIA

Cost-effectiveness of aid

The benefits of aid need to outweigh the cost of delivering it.

Transaction costs are high…and increasing.– Scaling-up of aid– More donors.– New business model is expensive.

Is aid cost effective?

800

750

700

650

600

550

450

Vietnam (791)

Cambodia (568)

Honduras (521)

Mongolia (479) Uganda (456)

10 453 missions in 34 countries in 2005

Number of donor missions in 2005

2008 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration:Purpose and Process

12th February 2008, Jakarta

1. Why monitor?

2. How is the survey set up?

2008 Survey process and products

3. How to manage the survey?

4. How to get help and FAQs?

WHY MONITOR?

Making aid work better

Knowing where we are today…– Accurate picture of aid practices

…and moving to where we want to be.

– Stimulate dialogue– Share understanding– Track progress – Get action

OUTPUTS

National level outputs

Two reports from OECD DAC– Country chapters– Overview of Results

Key reports for HLF 3

PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES

ASIA & PACIFIC (11)

AfghanistanBangladesh Cambodia IndonesiaMongoliaNepalVietnamPhilippinesTongaLao PDRKyrgyz Republic

Africa: 27 Arab states: 4Europe: 3Latin america & the caribbean: 7

Total 53 participating countries

12 INDICATORS PRINCIPLES INDICATORS SURVEY REVIEW

S

Ownership 1 National development strategies

Alignment 2 Quality of country systems

3 Alignment: aid is on budget

Harmonisation

4 Coordinated support for capacity development

5 Use of country systems

6 Parallel PIUs

7 In-year predictability of aid

8 Aid is untied

9 Programme-based approaches

10 Joint missions & analytic work

Managing for Results

11 Results-oriented frameworks

Mutual Accountabilit

y

12 Reviews of mutual performance

ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES

National Coordinator: – Manage the survey – Ensure relevant stakeholders are

informed of the survey – Convene and chair meetings

needed to complete the survey– Ensure quality control and

consistency of data Submit Results to

hlfsurvey@oecd.org

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Donor Focal Point – Support the National Coordinator – Collect questionnaire from donors

in a timely manner– Consolidate donor questionnaire

data in the Country Spreadsheet– Identify additional support.

SURVEY TOOLS

1. Explanatory Note

2. Donor Questionnaire

3. Government Questionnaire

4. Country Spreadsheet

5. Country Report

6. Definitions and Guidance

www.oecd.org/dac/hlfsurvey

SURVEY PROCESS

Agree on the process

Donor questionnaires are distributed to all donors providing ODA in the country.

Government questionnaire is prepared by coordinating inputs from all parts of government managing ODA.

Definitions and Guidance used for definitions and criteria.

1. DATA COLLECTION

2. DATA CONSOLIDATION

Donor Questionnaires are returned to the Donor Focal Point;

Donor questionnaire returns are consolidated into the Country Spreadsheet

Government questionnaire results consolidated into the Country Spreadsheet

3. VALIDATION & DIALOGUE

Review Country Spreadsheet;

Prepare Qualitative assessment of the survey

Meeting with donors, government, and CSOs to finalise and validate documents

Survey results (one Country Spreadsheet and one Country Report) submitted to hlfsurvey@oecd.org by 31 March

4. ANALYSIS

Country chapters will be prepared by OECD;

First draft of the country chapters shared with national coordinators for comments between May – Sept.

The Overview of Results finalised

In –country analysis and possible cross country analysis for region

Three key definitions for the survey

Recording aid

What is recorded? ODA – Aid provided by official donors– Aid for development & concessional

(loans).– Aid disbursed at country level.

What is not recorded?– Private flows (CSOs, Gates foundation)– Debt cancellation & rescheduling. – Humanitarian assistance.– Regional programmes.

Aid for the government sector

Definition:Aid disbursed in the context of an agreement with administrations (ministries, departments, agencies or municipalities)…….authorised to receive revenue or undertake expenditures on behalf of central government.

Can aid provided by a donor to an NGO/Private Company count as aid for the government sector?

Yes… as long as the NGO/Private company is implemeting a development programme on behalf of government.

Delegated cooperation

Example:Japan gives $ 1 million to Unicef for a development programme in Vietnam.

Who completes the questionnaire? Japan or Unicef?

Unicef should complete the questionnaire (not Japan).

Why?Survey measures effective aid delivery.Not ‘efforts’ made by donors.

HOW TO GET HELP?

UNDP survey orientation workshops

Help Desk (hlfsurvey@oecd.org) UNDP Aidan Cox and Tom Beloe (Asia-Pacific)Gert Danielsen (East/South Africa, Latin America) Julien Chevillard(Francophone Africa) Artemy Izmestiev (ECIS)

World Bank Soe Lin Bee Ean Gooi Janet EntwistleFilippo Cavassini

OECD Misaki WatanabeSimon Mizrahi Sara Fyson